From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!psinntp!scylla!daryl Tue Jan 28 12:18:36 EST 1992
Article 3208 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!psinntp!scylla!daryl
>From: daryl@oracorp.com
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Intelligence Testing
Message-ID: <1992Jan28.143329.4154@oracorp.com>
Date: 28 Jan 92 14:33:29 GMT
Organization: ORA Corporation
Lines: 15

David Gudeman writes:

> And I did not say that I think intelligence could very well arise by
> accident.  Frankly, I find the idea preposterous.  Not logically
> impossible, but so improbable that it doesn't bear considering except
> under an enormous amount of evidence.  All I said is that if the
> evidence accumulated, I would be willing to believe it.  Frankly, I
> would have a strong prefence for the cheating theory.

Isn't human intelligence an example of intelligence arising by
accident? Or do you think that we're cheating?

Daryl McCullough
ORA Corp.
Ithaca, NY 14850-1313


