From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!torn!utzoo!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!skule.ecf!utcsri!rpi!uwm.edu!spool.mu.edu!uunet!mcsun!sunic!dkuug!daimi!oreinert Wed Sep 23 16:54:31 EDT 1992
Article 6986 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!torn!utzoo!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!skule.ecf!utcsri!rpi!uwm.edu!spool.mu.edu!uunet!mcsun!sunic!dkuug!daimi!oreinert
>From: oreinert@daimi.aau.dk (Olavur Heri Reinert)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: what is consciousness for?
Message-ID: <1992Sep19.222725.26383@daimi.aau.dk>
Date: 19 Sep 92 22:27:25 GMT
References: <1992Aug13.025506.2404@news.media.mit.edu> <1992Aug17.171723.5599@spss.com> <iordonez.715366473@academ01> <1992Sep1.183909.4018@spss.com> <iordonez.716751021@academ01>
Sender: news@daimi.aau.dk
Distribution: comp.ai.philosophy
Organization: DAIMI: Computer Science Department, Aarhus University, Denmark
Lines: 26

iordonez@academ01.mty.itesm.mx (Ivan Ordonez-Reinoso) writes:
>I think we have a notion of beauty, but I couldn't say what it is. I
>would even dare to say nobody has the least idea of what beauty is,
>since nobody has ever formalized the concept yet.

   The concept 'red' is not formalised either, would you claim that
none of us have "the least idea of" what red is?

> Or do you have a
>computer program that can read any input (a symphony, the picture of a
>flower, a book from Kafka, a theorem, a sunset) and find its degree of
>beauty? However, we can, at least, recognize what is _not beauty_.

   I would say what is beautiful or not depends on your cultural
background and personal taste. I don't think you'll ever find a single
thing about which all people in the world will agree "it's not
beautiful".

>Theism is not the only alternative to materialism. My claim is that it
>is erroneous to speak about consciousness as if it were just another
>organ in our bodies, or another function of an organ, like 'vision' or
>hearing.

   I agree.

/Olav


