From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!mips!wrdis01!nstn.ns.ca!pony.acadiau.ca!aucs!890045c Tue Jan 28 12:17:54 EST 1992
Article 3157 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!mips!wrdis01!nstn.ns.ca!pony.acadiau.ca!aucs!890045c
>From: 890045c@aucs.acadiau.ca (Frank Cheeseman)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Intelligence Testing
Message-ID: <890045c.696446409@aucs>
Date: 26 Jan 92 17:20:09 GMT
References: <11906@optima.cs.arizona.edu> <1992Jan26.143717.3591@csc.canterbury.ac.nz>
Sender: news@pony.acadiau.ca (USENet News)
Organization: Acadia University
Lines: 16
Nntp-Posting-Host: aucs.acadiau.ca

chisnall@cosc.canterbury.ac.nz (The Technicolour Throw-up) writes:

>From article <11906@optima.cs.arizona.edu>, by gudeman@cs.arizona.edu (David Gudeman):
>> I don't have any problem believing that machine intelligence is
>> possible, I just don't think you can say that some behavior is a sign
>> of intelligence when you can completely explain the behavior without
>> refering to intelligence.  That sort of belief is completely
>> unmotivated.  (Or motivated by sloppy thinking.)

>I take it therefore that you believe in dualism?

Come on, aren't you just pu-pu'ing their beliefs here...

>--
>Just my two rubber ningis worth.
>Name: Michael Chisnall          email: chisnall@cosc.canterbury.ac.nz


