Article View: comp.ai
Article #8581Re: Can Machines Think?
From: Paul V Torek
Date: Wed, 03 Jan 1990 16:48
Date: Wed, 03 Jan 1990 16:48
17 lines
1424 bytes
1424 bytes
kp@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com (Ken Presting) writes: >If a numerical model of the brain is claimed to be accurate except for >"noise", and therefore claimed to be conscious, then it must be shown >that what is called "noise" is irrelevant to consciousness (or thinking). Are you suggesting that (a) Some types of conscious thought might go wrong were it not for the "noise", or (b) Although a "noiseless" system might pass the Turing Test, "noise" might be necessary for consciousness to exist at all? (Or something else?) Most of the rest of your article suggests (a), but (b) strikes me as a more interesting thesis. I can't think of any argument against (b). -- "There ain't no sanity clause" --Marx Paul Torek flink@mimsy.umd.edu
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<21606@mimsy.umd.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!ark1!nems!mimsy!flinkReferences:
<31821@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu> <ebfl02Ef76Hs01@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com> <32029@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu> <f6xk02b078qO01@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!ark1!nems!mimsy!flink From: flink@mimsy.umd.edu (Paul V Torek) Newsgroups: comp.ai,talk.philosophy.misc,sci.philosophy.tech Subject: Re: Can Machines Think? Summary: Is "noise" necessary for consciousness? Message-ID: <21606@mimsy.umd.edu> Date: 3 Jan 90 16:48:38 GMT References: <31821@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu> <ebfl02Ef76Hs01@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com> <32029@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu> <f6xk02b078qO01@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com> Reply-To: flink@mimsy.umd.edu (Paul V Torek) Distribution: na Organization: U of Maryland, Dept. of Computer Science, Coll. Pk., MD 20742 Lines: 17