From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!jupiter!morgan.ucs.mun.ca!nstn.ns.ca!aunro!ukma!wupost!uunet!mcsun!uknet!edcastle!aiai!jeff Tue Nov 26 12:32:30 EST 1991
Article 1597 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!jupiter!morgan.ucs.mun.ca!nstn.ns.ca!aunro!ukma!wupost!uunet!mcsun!uknet!edcastle!aiai!jeff
>From: jeff@aiai.ed.ac.uk (Jeff Dalton)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Is "logic" important?
Message-ID: <5697@skye.ed.ac.uk>
Date: 25 Nov 91 21:26:52 GMT
References: <Pg99aB3w164w@depsych.Gwinnett.COM>
Reply-To: jeff@aiai.UUCP (Jeff Dalton)
Organization: AIAI, University of Edinburgh, Scotland
Lines: 10

In article <Pg99aB3w164w@depsych.Gwinnett.COM> rc@depsych.Gwinnett.COM (Richard Carlson) writes:
>But it seems to me that the most important aspects of human
>thought are dialectical and therefore cannot be either formalized
>or automated.  How can we devise a formula to give us the one and
>only contrary to "hot" or "white?"  Is the contrary to white
>"black?"  What's the contrary to "red?"

I'm sorry, but are those examples supposed to show that the
most important aspects of human thought cannot be formalized
or automated?  


