From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!yale.edu!spool.mu.edu!uunet!tdatirv!sarima Tue Apr  7 23:24:06 EDT 1992
Article 4913 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!yale.edu!spool.mu.edu!uunet!tdatirv!sarima
>From: sarima@tdatirv.UUCP (Stanley Friesen)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: intelligent organic goop
Message-ID: <505@tdatirv.UUCP>
Date: 3 Apr 92 19:46:35 GMT
Article-I.D.: tdatirv.505
References: <7341@uqcspe.cs.uq.oz.au> <1992Mar31.182905.25732@cs.ucf.edu> <1992Apr01.210117.26523@spss.com>
Reply-To: sarima@tdatirv.UUCP (Stanley Friesen)
Organization: Teradata Corp., Irvine
Lines: 19

In article <1992Apr01.210117.26523@spss.com> markrose@spss.com (Mark Rosenfelder) writes:
|>  Were the AI implemented entirely in  
|>software, then the heap or the device drivers would be unidentifiable.
|>
|>If such parts are identifiable, then I suspect, the system could not be visibly  
|>intelligent.  
|
|It sounds like you're saying that you can't call a system intelligent if you
|can figure out how it works.  Sounds barmy to me.  If we knew exactly how
|the brain worked, would be cease to be intelligent?

He is wrong in another respect also.  Even at our current, rather minimal,
level of knowledge about the brain and the mind we have found identifiable
parts thereof.  And the more we know about the brain and mind, the more
identifiable parts we find.

-- 
---------------
uunet!tdatirv!sarima				(Stanley Friesen)


