Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.cac.psu.edu!news.pop.psu.edu!psuvax1!news.ecn.bgu.edu!feenix.metronet.com!rtxserv
From: rtxserv@metronet.com (Bill Wallace)
Subject: Re: When is a simulation of an X an X?
Message-ID: <D34G26.MoC@metronet.com>
Date: Sat, 28 Jan 1995 15:22:53 GMT
References: <D2yqLF.AM6@metronet.com> <Pine.HPP.3.91.950127181756.4921B-100000@acg60.wfunet.wfu.edu>
Organization: Texas Metronet, Internet for the Individual  214-705-2901 (info)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Lines: 27

helen ruth etters (etters@wfu.edu) wrote:
: On Wed, 25 Jan 1995, Bill Wallace wrote:

: > I have sampled the the thread called "When is a simulation of a Y a Y?"
: > with a great deal of interest. I responded to it but it seems to have
: > been lost or ignored.
: > 
: > My answer to the question is: when the observer has NO independent
: > method of determining which is which. Virtual reality of the distant
: > future?
: > 
: > Bill Wallace
: > 
: I suggest that the thread in question does not lead so easily out of the 
: labyrinth. A fake Rembrandt is a simulation of a Rembrandt, but even if 
: an observer had no independent method of determining its inauthentic 
: status, it still is not a Rembrandt.
:   

:     @     @                                                 @     @     @  
:  @  |  @  |  @                                           @  |  @  |  @  |  @
: \|/\|/\|/\|/\|/             Helen Etters                \|/\|/\|/\|/\|/\|/\|/
: ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
For you to say that "it still is not a Rembrandt" requires some means for
you to tell the difference.

Bill
