Re: computer pain

2006-12-26 Thread Brent Meeker
Stathis Papaioannou wrote: Hello Dave/Chris, I agree with everything you say, and have long admired The Hedonistic Imperative. Motivation need not be linked to pain, and for that matter it need not be linked to pleasure either. We can imagine an artificial intelligence without any

RE: computer pain

2006-12-26 Thread Stathis Papaioannou
Brent Meeker writes: I agree with everything you say, and have long admired The Hedonistic Imperative. Motivation need not be linked to pain, and for that matter it need not be linked to pleasure either. We can imagine an artificial intelligence without any emotions but completely

Re: Evil ? (was: Hypostases (was: Natural Order Belief)

2006-12-26 Thread Bruno Marchal
Le 25-déc.-06, à 01:13, Tom Caylor a écrit : It looks like I might have timed out. Hopefully this doesn't appear two times. On Dec 24, 8:55 am, Bruno Marchal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Le 24-déc.-06, à 09:48, Tom Caylor a écrit : Bruno, ... I believe the answer to the question, What is

Re: Evil ? (was: Hypostases (was: Natural Order Belief)

2006-12-26 Thread Tom Caylor
On Dec 26, 9:51 am, Bruno Marchal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Le 25-déc.-06, à 01:13, Tom Caylor a écrit : The crux is that he is not symbolic... I respect your belief or faith, but I want to be frank, I have no evidences for the idea that Jesus is truth, nor can I be sure of any clear

Re: computer pain

2006-12-26 Thread Brent Meeker
Stathis Papaioannou wrote: Brent Meeker writes: I agree with everything you say, and have long admired The Hedonistic Imperative. Motivation need not be linked to pain, and for that matter it need not be linked to pleasure either. We can imagine an artificial intelligence without any

Re: Evil ?

2006-12-26 Thread John Mikes
Brent, you don't REALLY put strange (implied?) words in my mouth, but that gives the impression to the innocent byreader that I said anything like that. BM: Did I claim that we had reached a complete inventory?? JM: No, you only said: It is only your opinion that the inventory is *necessarily*

Re: Evil ?

2006-12-26 Thread Brent Meeker
John Mikes wrote: Brent, you don't REALLY put strange (implied?) words in my mouth, but that gives the impression to the innocent byreader that I said anything like that. BM: Did I claim that we had reached a complete inventory?? JM: No, you only said: It is only your opinion that the

Re: Evil ? (was: Hypostases (was: Natural Order Belief)

2006-12-26 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I regard the idea of believing to be unsound, because it is a pre-Freudian concept, which assumes that each person has a single self that maintains beliefs. A more realistic view is that each person is constantly switching among various different ways to think in which different assertions,

Re: Evil ? (was: Hypostases

2006-12-26 Thread Brent Meeker
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I regard the idea of believing to be unsound, because it is a pre-Freudian concept, which assumes that each person has a single self that maintains beliefs. A more realistic view is that each person is constantly switching among various different ways to think in

RE: Evil ? (was: Hypostases (was: Natural Order Belief)

2006-12-26 Thread Stathis Papaioannou
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: everything-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: Evil ? (was: Hypostases (was: Natural Order Belief) Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2006 14:59:17 -0800 I regard the idea of believing to be unsound, because it is a pre-Freudian

RE: Evil ? (was: Hypostases (was: Natural Order Belief)

2006-12-26 Thread Jef Allbright
Stathis Papaioannou wrote: But our main criterion for what to believe should be what is true, right? I find it fascinating, as well as consistent with some difficulties in communication about the most basic concepts, that Stathis would express this belief of his in the form of a tautology.

Re: Evil ? (was: Hypostases (was: Natural Order Belief)

2006-12-26 Thread Tom Caylor
On Dec 26, 3:59 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I regard the idea of believing to be unsound, because it is a pre-Freudian concept, which assumes that each person has a single self that maintains beliefs. A more realistic view is that each person is constantly switching among

Re: Evil ? (was: Hypostases

2006-12-26 Thread Brent Meeker
Tom Caylor wrote: On Dec 26, 3:59 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I regard the idea of believing to be unsound, because it is a pre-Freudian concept, which assumes that each person has a single self that maintains beliefs. A more realistic view is that each person is

Re: Evil ? (was: Hypostases

2006-12-26 Thread Tom Caylor
On Dec 26, 7:53 pm, Brent Meeker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Tom Caylor wrote: On Dec 26, 3:59 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I regard the idea of believing to be unsound, because it is a pre-Freudian concept, which assumes that each person has a single self that maintains

Re: Evil ?

2006-12-26 Thread Brent Meeker
Tom Caylor wrote: On Dec 26, 7:53 pm, Brent Meeker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Tom Caylor wrote: On Dec 26, 3:59 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I regard the idea of believing to be unsound, because it is a pre-Freudian concept, which assumes that each person has a single

RE: computer pain

2006-12-26 Thread Stathis Papaioannou
Brent Meeker writes: My computer is completely dedicated to sending this email when I click on send. Actually, it probably isn't. You probably have a multi-tasking operating system which assigns priorities to different tasks (which is why it sometimes can be as annoying as a human