From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!mcnc!ecsgate!lrc.edu!lehman_ds Tue Jan 28 12:16:21 EST 1992
Article 3048 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!mcnc!ecsgate!lrc.edu!lehman_ds
>From: lehman_ds@lrc.edu
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Impossibility of flight vs impossibility of AI
Message-ID: <1992Jan22.173928.138@lrc.edu>
Date: 22 Jan 92 22:39:27 GMT
References: <1992Jan21.144204.29245@oracorp.com> <1992Jan21.184559.17670@aisb.ed.ac.uk>
Organization: Lenoir-Rhyne College, Hickory, NC
Lines: 14

In article <1992Jan21.184559.17670@aisb.ed.ac.uk>, jeff@aisb.ed.ac.uk (Jeff Dalton) writes:
> In article <1992Jan21.144204.29245@oracorp.com> daryl@oracorp.com writes:
>>
>>I was trying to make an analogy between artificial intelligence and
>>artificial flight. Considering birds and bees as evidence for the
>>possibility of an artificial flying machine is comparable, in my
>>opinion, to considering humans as evidence of the possibility of an
>>artificial thinking machine.
> 
> Flight is not analogous to consciousness, thinking, etc, because
> as-if flight is the same as flight.
  I think that is the point he was trying to make.
    Drew Lehman
    Lehman_ds@lrc.edu


