From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!caen!garbo.ucc.umass.edu!dime!chelm.cs.umass.edu!yodaiken Mon Dec 16 11:02:09 EST 1991
Article 2146 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!caen!garbo.ucc.umass.edu!dime!chelm.cs.umass.edu!yodaiken
>From: yodaiken@chelm.cs.umass.edu (victor yodaiken)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Scaled up slug brains
Message-ID: <40673@dime.cs.umass.edu>
Date: 16 Dec 91 00:23:17 GMT
References: <12689@pitt.UUCP> <40650@dime.cs.umass.edu> <12708@pitt.UUCP>
Sender: news@dime.cs.umass.edu
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Lines: 25

In article <12708@pitt.UUCP> geb@dsl.pitt.edu (gordon e. banks) writes:
>In article <40650@dime.cs.umass.edu> yodaiken@chelm.cs.umass.edu (victor yodaiken) writes:
>
>>Appears to whom? I must say that you have an interesting approach
>>to science. We understand a tiny bit of how system X works, system
>>Y is vastly more complicated than system X but contains similar looking
>>structures --- so assume that some unproven model of X is also a model of
>>Y.
>
>Put it this way.  We understand the way system X(1) works.  System X(2)
>is a little bit more complex than X(1).  It is a good bet that it
>works the same way, but is just more complex.  X(3) is a bit more
>complex than X(2).  And so on until we get to humans X(n).  There

We differ on "good bet". You may be proved correct, but you are still
speculating. 

>isn't really any place where you can draw the line since as you
>look at different organisms, there seems to be a pretty smooth progression
>in complexity.  The place most people who draw lines draw it is between

Does not seem that way to me. At each step there seem to be radical
changes. Do slugs play? warn each other of danger?   make
tools? speak? 



