From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!psych.toronto.edu!michael Tue May 12 15:49:22 EDT 1992
Article 5448 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy,talk.phlisophy.misc
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!psych.toronto.edu!michael
>From: michael@psych.toronto.edu (Michael Gemar)
Subject: Re: Question: Minds and Machines
Organization: Department of Psychology, University of Toronto
References: <1992May2.170158.5837@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu> <1992May5.201703.17963@psych.toronto.edu> <OZ.92May6132613@ursa.sis.yorku.ca>
Message-ID: <1992May7.153948.8766@psych.toronto.edu>
Date: Thu, 7 May 1992 15:39:48 GMT

In article <OZ.92May6132613@ursa.sis.yorku.ca> oz@ursa.sis.yorku.ca (Ozan Yigit) writes:
>christo@psych.toronto.edu (Christopher Green) writes:
>
>   bill@NSMA.AriZonA.EdU (Bill Skaggs) writes:
>   
>   >  Regarding (1), the greatest resemblence is at a very abstract level:
>   >both computers and brains are essentially information processing
>   >devices.  
>
>   Nothing like a little whole-hearted question-begging to get things
>   off on the right foot, eh? Brains are no more *essentially* information
>   processing devices than weather systems are. [etc]
>
>Nothing like a little pronouncement to the contrary to get things off on
>the right foot, eh? Now, if we only had some substance...
>
>   Nice try. :-)
>
>Your turn.

Can I play? :-)  Although I will admit to both an academic and personal
bias, I don't see why you think Chris is out of line here.  The question
we are trying to answer is, at least in part, how similar brains and
computers are.  To *assert* the above similarity is simply to beg the
question we are trying to answer.  If someone want to offer *arguments*
about this *essential* nature of the brain, in constrast to weather
systems, the stock market, the movement of galaxies, etc., then we
*would* have some substance...

Ball's in your court.

- michael


