Article View: comp.ai
Article #1228Re: Algorithms, Turing, Semantics
From: Norm Gall
Date: Sat, 13 Jan 1990 20:37
Date: Sat, 13 Jan 1990 20:37
28 lines
1590 bytes
1590 bytes
kadickey@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Kent Andrew Dickey) writes: | I clearly must be missing something very important to all of these | discussions. Therefore, before I spew out my version of the world, I | have three questions: | 1) Could someone name one process which cannot be broken down into an | algorithm? That is, many people have said the mind may not be simulated | through an algorith, but personally, no other examples of | non-alogorithmical processes occur to me. Please, someone, tell me what | obvious example I'm missing. Well, no one has convincingly established that 'the mind' is a process (or collection of precesses, etc), so I can say that all processes _can_ be broken down into an algorthm, there is nothing that isn't a process that can be 'algorithmised', and hence, the mind cannot be broken down into amn algorithm. I am quite sure few _here_ will concur. nrg -- York University | "Philosophers who make the general claim that a Department of Philosophy | rule simply 'reduces to' its formulations Toronto, Ontario, Canada | are using Occam's razor to cut the throat _________________________| of common sense.' - R. Harris
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<6472@yunexus.UUCP>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!yunexus!gallReferences:
<12883@phoenix.Princeton.EDU>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!yunexus!gall From: gall@yunexus.UUCP (Norm Gall) Newsgroups: comp.ai Subject: Re: Algorithms, Turing, Semantics Message-ID: <6472@yunexus.UUCP> Date: 13 Jan 90 20:37:59 GMT Article-I.D.: yunexus.6472 References: <12883@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> Reply-To: gall@yunexus.UUCP Organization: York University Department of Philosophy Lines: 28