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 11:02:12 EST 1991
Article 2150 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: From neurons to computation: how?
Message-ID: <40684@dime.cs.umass.edu>
Date: 16 Dec 91 03:45:26 GMT
References: <1991Dec14.110633.28844@oracorp.com> <40640@dime.cs.umass.edu> <12707@pitt.UUCP>
Sender: news@dime.cs.umass.edu
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Lines: 27

In article <12707@pitt.UUCP> geb@dsl.pitt.edu (gordon e. banks) writes:
>I think the brain is much more highly structured and organized that
>the atmosphere, but even if this were granted, it still does not
>preclude the possibility of creating the brain.  Even complex
>man-made systems can have emergent behavior that was not designed
>or forseen.  Why could not an artificial brain do so as well as
>a real brain?

Well, obviously we can create thinking beings via sexual reproduction. In
principle, one could do the same from the right collection of elemental
chemicals. Maybe we could even find another recipe by trial and error.
But we still would not understand how the things work.

>>brain, and whether these "elements" behave like digital computers. 
>>
>I must have missed where someone claimed that.


In article <310@tdatirv.UUCP>, sarima@tdatirv (Stanley Friesen) writes:
>So, until the neurologists find a problem with the model of mind as the
>emergent product of neural data processing, I will apply KISS and assume
>that this model is correct, or at least a useful aproximation.

>And I mean computable in the sense that physical computers as we build them
>today could compute the same data transform as any given neuron (including
>the temporal variability we calling learning).



