Newsgroups: rec.arts.books,comp.ai,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.cognitive,sci.psychology.theory
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!cornellcs!travelers.mail.cornell.edu!news.kei.com!news.mathworks.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!allegra!alice!rhh
From: rhh@research.att.com (Ron Hardin <9289-11216> 0112110)
Subject: Re: Does AI make philosophy obsolete?
Message-ID: <DFyCMy.10p@research.att.com>
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Murray Hill, NJ
References: <DFqyp6.9oD@research.att.com> <44pmlt$5pr@scotsman.ed.ac.uk> <DFvFvv.K3@research.att.com> <44ru7v$rfj@scotsman.ed.ac.uk> <DFxAAp.F1I@research.att.com> <JMC.95Oct4085621@Steam.stanford.edu>
Date: Thu, 5 Oct 1995 01:40:09 GMT
Lines: 9
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.ai:33865 comp.ai.philosophy:33376 sci.cognitive:9870 sci.psychology.theory:939

John McCarthy writes:
>Computers are mechanical but not "mechanical" in the sense of
>clockwork.  All the elaborate 18th century clocks went through a
>sequence of actions that was completely independent of the external
>environment - unless the clock broke.  Computers have conditional
>branching instructions, and this permits them to be programmed to pay
>attention tothe external world.

Would you want to say a mouse trap is mechanical?
