From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!wupost!uunet!psinntp!scylla!daryl Thu Jan 16 17:19:57 EST 1992
Article 2668 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!wupost!uunet!psinntp!scylla!daryl
>From: daryl@oracorp.com
Subject: Re: "causal powers"
Message-ID: <1992Jan13.201001.13986@oracorp.com>
Organization: ORA Corporation
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1992 20:10:01 GMT

James Peterson writes:

>>Hence my question: is there anything that a human can cause that a CR
>>or a computer cannot? [ Does a human have any] 
>>causal powers (quoted or not) that the CR or computer lacks?

> Of course.  A non-determined *choice*.  A human can "cause" itself to
> think and act in ways that are not "determined" by the physical causal nexus,
> but are rather "motivated" by experience and values..  Humans can "cause"
> their thoughts to occur -- they can make things happen for reasons of their
> own, independent of the forces of nature (which is all a computer, or
> a printing press or grain thresher for that matter, have for "causal powers")

It is not at all clear to me that non-determined choices are important
for thoughyt and creativity. And even if they are, you can always add
dice rolls to the CR rules.

Bringing up free will doesn't do anything but shift the problem
around. Searle replaces the original question "Can a computer
understand?" by the much fuzzier question "Can a computer have causal
powers?", and now you are suggesting the replacement "Can a computer
have free will?". I don't see that this helps.

Daryl McCullough
ORA Corp.
Ithaca, NY










