From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!ames!haven.umd.edu!mimsy!harwood Wed Dec 18 16:02:05 EST 1991
Article 2181 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!ames!haven.umd.edu!mimsy!harwood
>From: harwood@umiacs.umd.edu (David Harwood)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Scaled up slug brains
Message-ID: <45031@mimsy.umd.edu>
Date: 17 Dec 91 05:04:51 GMT
References: <12723@pitt.UUCP> <60372@netnews.upenn.edu> <349@idtg.UUCP>
Sender: news@mimsy.umd.edu
Organization: UMIACS, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742
Lines: 34

In article <349@idtg.UUCP> dow@idtg.UUCP (Keith Dow) writes:

>Since humans evolved from the level of slugs and other lower life forms 
>(i.e. graduate students), what is the problem with the idea that gradual
>improvements lead to what we are now?
\\\\\\\\\\\\\
	Personally, I think humans are retrograde porpoise-heads, and
that there's more evidence for this than for, say, Fido being a scaled-
up slug-brain.
	As I said before, despite the neuron doctrine, I guess that the
neuro-morphogenesis of different species (and of individuals, for that
matter) is very specific, and sensitive to small genetic variation. 
(How many genes do slugs have anyway? They don't look like they have many.)
	(For example, sex hormones have a significant effect, apparently, 
both on brain anatomy and behavior, according to some recent studies. One
wrong gene can make for plenty of trouble in anatomy, physiology, and 
behavior. Scaled-up slug-brain NN simulation ignores genetics, biochemistry, 
neuro-morphogenesis, etc, as if all neurons were glorified transistors no
matter how they were manufactured.)
	I would guess that evolution of species is not nearly so gradual
as popularly imagined. (For one thing, there are discontinuous discrete
constraints on genetic information and biochemical products, in individuals
and in their enviroment.)
	So my guess is that no matter how you cut and paste slug-neurons,
you will never get an intelligible bark out of neo-Fido; indeed, if you
tinker very much, you won't even get an ordinary quack out of your neo-slug
since the pieces of the puzzle simply won't fit.
	I'm not denying the possibility of creating artificial intelligence,
but it probably won't be human intelligence, whatever it is. (On the other
hand, it might well cause many people to think that human beings are 
scaled-up slug-brains or retarded super-computers, and that computer
scientists are gods, I suppose.)
D.H.



