From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!torn!cs.utexas.edu!wupost!waikato.ac.nz!aukuni.ac.nz!kcbbs!nacjack!codewks!system Mon Oct 19 16:59:46 EDT 1992
Article 7327 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!torn!cs.utexas.edu!wupost!waikato.ac.nz!aukuni.ac.nz!kcbbs!nacjack!codewks!system
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Simulated Brain
Message-ID: <g87wsB1w165w@CODEWKS.nacjack.gen.nz>
>From: system@CODEWKS.nacjack.gen.nz (Wayne McDougall)
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 92 14:55:39 NZDST
References: <1992Oct13.085347.13831@klaava.Helsinki.FI>
Organization: The Code Works Limited, PO Box 10 155, Auckland, New Zealand
Lines: 23

amnell@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Marko Amnell) writes:

> splendour?  What I'm saying is that maybe machines could one day think,
> but they still wouldn't be conscious in the way we are.
> 
> -- 
> Marko Amnell

Hmmm, excuse me for coming in late, but in what way are we "conscious"?

That is, to what are you referring that is above and beyond thinking?

Or "if nobody's home, there ain't nobody home", then who or what is 
normally at home?

I think I am asking for a definition of "conscious" as it may be being 
shared by participants in this discussion (or may not be).

-- 
  Wayne McDougall, BCNU
  This .sig unintentionally left blank.

Hello! I'm a .SIG Virus. Copy me and spread the fun.


