From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ncar!hsdndev!husc-news.harvard.edu!coolidge!zeleny Wed Feb  5 11:57:03 EST 1992
Article 3484 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Xref: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca comp.ai.philosophy:3484 sci.philosophy.tech:2046
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ncar!hsdndev!husc-news.harvard.edu!coolidge!zeleny
>From: zeleny@coolidge.harvard.edu (Mikhail Zeleny)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy,sci.philosophy.tech
Subject: Re: Robotic Follies (was re: Strong AI and Panpsy
Keywords: panpsychism
Message-ID: <1992Feb4.191756.8478@husc3.harvard.edu>
Date: 5 Feb 92 00:17:54 GMT
References: <1992Feb2.221112.16576@ida.liu.se> <1992Feb3.104210.8401@husc3.harvard.edu> <1992Feb4.015001.9719@nuscc.nus.sg>
Organization: Dept. of Math, Harvard Univ.
Lines: 76
Nntp-Posting-Host: coolidge.harvard.edu

In article <1992Feb4.015001.9719@nuscc.nus.sg> 
smoliar@iss.nus.sg (stephen smoliar) writes:

>In article <1992Feb3.104210.8401@husc3.harvard.edu> 
>zeleny@coolidge.harvard.edu (Mikhail Zeleny) writes:

MZ:
>>What I do find objectionable is the rampant ignorance that produces
>>sweeping statements like "So as far as I'm concerned, it is the use of this
>>word [i.e. `consciousness'], as though it represents anything important,
>>e.g., some irreducible attribute of mind -- that has kept philosophy, since
>>the time of Kant, from contributing important insights to psychology."  To
>>me, this position represents a wholesale rejection of two centuries of
>>intense intellectual pursuits by some of the greatest minds mankind has
>>managed to produce; the fact that Minsky manages to emit this blatant
>>balderdash makes him an intellectual peer of the Soviet ideologues of the
>>Forties, who had no trouble characterizing cybernetics as "the painted
>>whore of Imperialism".  Sorry, but from my perspective the extent and depth
>>of Minsky's contribution to human culture is in no way comparable to those
>>of  Kant, Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, or Freud.

SS:
>It is always a bit risky trying to speak for Minsky, but I shall take the risk
>of sticking my neck out an inch or two.  I am not sure that Minsky is
>particularly concerned with contributing to "human culture."  He is certainly
>interested in influencing how we think about minds--our own, those we have
>encountered, and those we might encounter.  Since one could make a case that
>such thought is part of our "culture," one might say that he is making an
>indirect contribution.  However, his style is to provoke us into asking
>questions, rather than accepting answers.  This style sharply contrasts
>the attitude of adoration which one frequently (but, fortunately, not always)
>finds among academic philosophers who are more interested in the pedestals
>which bear the weight of Kant, Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, and Freud than in
>why "human culture" has decided to place them on those pedestals.  Like
>Wittgenstein, Minsky struggles with his questions, even when those struggles
>take him further from, rather than closer to, any possible answers.  Perhaps
>his contribution to "human culture" is that such struggles are just as
>"legitimate," if not more so, as those which lead to nice neat theses and
>treatises.

You must be reading my articles for the first time, if you associate my
critique of Minsky with a reverential attitude towards any kind of
pedestals; moreover, you must have spent very little time thinking about
the work of Kant and company, if you are able to characterize it as "nice
neat theses and treatises".  Worst of all, you seem to assume a false
dichotomy between Minskian disdain for philosophical thought, and
uncritical acceptance of textbook answers that surely is far more common in
computer science than in philosophy departments.  To paraphrase my friend
Tal Kubo, I am certainly not interested in presenting an encomium for the
philosophical tradition (much of which I am inclined to reject), -- my
concern is solely with chastising an ignorant attempt of its wholesale
dismissal, evidenced in Minsky's assertion I cited above.

There is no surer sign of militant mediocrity than vehement,
unsubstantiated, unqualified denunciation of an entire school of thought.
Accordingly, I hereby nominate Marvin Minsky for the 1992 Stalin Prize for
scientific criticism.  

>-- 
>Stephen W. Smoliar; Institute of Systems Science
>National University of Singapore; Heng Mui Keng Terrace
>Kent Ridge, SINGAPORE 0511
>Internet:  smoliar@iss.nus.sg


`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'
: Qu'est-ce qui est bien?  Qu'est-ce qui est laid?         Harvard   :
: Qu'est-ce qui est grand, fort, faible...                 doesn't   :
: Connais pas! Connais pas!                                 think    :
:                                                             so     :
: Mikhail Zeleny                                                     :
: 872 Massachusetts Ave., Apt. 707                                   :
: Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139           (617) 661-8151            :
: email zeleny@zariski.harvard.edu or zeleny@HUMA1.BITNET            :
:                                                                    :
'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`


