Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.consciousness,sci.psychology,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.philosophy.meta
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!news.sei.cmu.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!swrinde!pipex!uknet!festival!edcogsci!jeff
From: jeff@aiai.ed.ac.uk (Jeff Dalton)
Subject: Re: Roger Penrose's New Book (in HTML) 1.0
Message-ID: <CzDpLz.5JA@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
Sender: usenet@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (C News Software)
Nntp-Posting-Host: cara.aiai.ed.ac.uk
Organization: AIAI, University of Edinburgh, Scotland
References: <384dsh$hrb@ixnews1.ix.netcom.com> <38gul0INNl0t@hoss.summit.novell.com> <39bhf5$1d1@news-rocq.inria.fr>
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 1994 21:13:11 GMT
Lines: 18
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu sci.skeptic:95458 sci.psychology:29851 comp.ai.philosophy:22122 sci.philosophy.meta:14804

In article <39bhf5$1d1@news-rocq.inria.fr> ziane@monica.inria.fr (Mikal Ziane (Univ. Paris 5 and INRIA) ) writes:
>In article <38gul0INNl0t@hoss.summit.novell.com>, skrenta@summit.novell.com (Rich Skrenta) writes:
>
>|> Surely researchers could spend their time more productively than
>|> arguing with philosophers about how many AI's can dance on the head
>|> of a pin.
>
>But if those philosophers were to convince sponsors...

Is that what's behind the extreme hostility to Penrose?

If so, it's rather odd.  Even if Penrose and even Searle were
completely right, it would make no difference to most AI research,
because most AI research is not about making articifial persons,
conscious machines, and the like.  Pointing *that* out sounds
like a much better strategy with sponsors to me.

-- jd
