From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!csd.unb.ca!morgan.ucs.mun.ca!nstn.ns.ca!aunro!ukma!wupost!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!unix.cis.pitt.edu!pitt!geb Mon Dec 16 11:01:11 EST 1991
Article 2044 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!csd.unb.ca!morgan.ucs.mun.ca!nstn.ns.ca!aunro!ukma!wupost!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!unix.cis.pitt.edu!pitt!geb
>From: geb@dsl.pitt.edu (gordon e. banks)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: From neurons to computation: how?
Message-ID: <12665@pitt.UUCP>
Date: 11 Dec 91 20:00:12 GMT
References: <40375@dime.cs.umass.edu> <12636@pitt.UUCP> <59809@netnews.upenn.edu>
Sender: news@cs.pitt.edu
Organization: Decision Systems Laboratory, Univ. of Pittsburgh, PA.
Lines: 40

In article <59809@netnews.upenn.edu> weemba@libra.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener) writes:
>
>You haven't come close to the >> form of your claim above.  A good
>deal of brain function can be characterized through neurons.  Much
>remains a baffling mystery.
>
Could you be more specific regarding which functions you feel are
not capable of being explained by neurons interacting?

>Since it hasn't been proven that it arises from neurons, either, what
>is your point?  That you have a mediocre talent for insulting people
>who ask embarrassing questions, like, "where's the evidence?"  I posted

Sorry, my intent was not to insult anyone, and unlike some people,
have no interest in developing a talent for it.

>an article on an experimentally testable proposal of Marshall that uses
>Froehlich's pumped phonon Bose-Einstein condensation idea based on
>quantizing cellular dipole vibrations as a basis for consciousness.
>
I didn't see your posting, so can't comment on it.  
>
>>>>>>I must conclude that however our brain may achieve meaning,
>>>>>>it is computable.
>

>You can believe what you like.  But conclude?  Tell us how, please.

This isn't my quote.  I don't know that this is true, but I have
yet to see any theoretical objection to the argument that the brain
is a machine, and thus capable of being replicated artificially with
sufficient technology.



-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gordon Banks  N3JXP      | "I have given you an argument; I am not obliged
geb@cadre.dsl.pitt.edu   |  to supply you with an understanding." -S.Johnson
----------------------------------------------------------------------------


