From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!psych.toronto.edu!michael Mon May 25 14:06:36 EDT 1992
Article 5783 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!psych.toronto.edu!michael
>From: michael@psych.toronto.edu (Michael Gemar)
Subject: Re: Grounding: Real vs. Virtual (formerly "on meaning")
Organization: Department of Psychology, University of Toronto
References: <1992May19.003821.9450@Princeton.EDU> <1992May19.221021.1619@psych.toronto.edu> <1992May20.030811.13711@mp.cs.niu.edu>
Message-ID: <1992May20.194044.8320@psych.toronto.edu>
Keywords: symbol, analog, Turing Test, robotics
Date: Wed, 20 May 1992 19:40:44 GMT

In article <1992May20.030811.13711@mp.cs.niu.edu> rickert@mp.cs.niu.edu (Neil Rickert) writes:

>  How can a human be raised in a completely virtual reality?  What is
>a virtual hunger pang?  What is a virtual runny nose?  How much
>excitement will there be in a virtual adrenaline rush?  How can a
>human learn to speak if he can neither hear his own voice nor feel the
>movement of his facial muscles?
>
>  I could go on, but I think you get the point.  There is a large amount
>of physical reality which is determined by the genes.  Can a brain live in
>a test tube, isolated from its physical reality, and still learn and
>develop normally?

I think you have misconstrued the word "virtual".  When I am using the
term, I am refering to *real* stimulation that produces *real* feelings,
but is caused by *virtual* objects, i.e., "objects" that only exist in
"cyberspace", but not in the real world.  If a virtual reality was an
accurate rendering of *this* world, then one *would* feal hunger pangs
(the neurons that fire when hungry would fire), hear one's own voice
(the auditory apparatus would be stimulated appropriately), etc.
The whole point of "virtual" realities is that they seem to the perceiver
to be *real*.

- michael



