Newsgroups: comp.ai.games
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!udel!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!rogue
From: rogue@netcom.com (R. Cliff Young)
Subject: Re: Reply to Loebner
Message-ID: <rogueD8BKyJ.8s6@netcom.com>
Organization: Rogue Bard
References: <3ncug7$igt@nunic.nu.edu> <D807qM.HD0@wave.scar.utoronto.ca> <3o8ltq$qat@bingnet1.cc.binghamton.edu> <3odvlm$go3@cassandra.cair.du.edu>
Date: Tue, 9 May 1995 16:39:55 GMT
Lines: 25
Sender: rogue@netcom13.netcom.com

In article <3odvlm$go3@cassandra.cair.du.edu>,
Robert A. Uhl <ruhl@phoebe.cair.du.edu> wrote:
>
>  No; cognition is the activity of the soul, which why no machine will
>ever be able to think. The brain calculates, the soul (or the mind, if
>you prefer) thinks.

Who says no machine will ever be able to possess a soul (or mind)?

>  I could fool you into thinking that I am a computer; does that make
>me a computer? No. A computer could fool you into believing that .1 -
>.1 is not equal to 0; does that make it so? No. A computer which can
>fool a human is not intelligent but rather a computer which can fool a
>human.

Agreed.  However, it's entirely likely that there may be intelligent
computers who just won't be terribly convincing in any attempts to pass
as humans.  Humanity is only an example of sentience--not its
definition.

-- 
R. Cliff Young <rogue@netcom.com>          \ Chaos Is Continual Creation
--------------------------------------------\            /\/
Rogue Bard Home Page:                        \       I Think I Am
   http://www.webcom.com/~rogue/              \ ...Therefore I Know I Think
