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!spool.mu.edu!munnari.oz.au!bruce!monu0.cc.monash.edu.au!monu6!john@publications.ccc.monash.edu.au Tue Nov 26 12:32:32 EST 1991
Article 1600 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Xref: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca rec.arts.books:10663 sci.philosophy.tech:1123 comp.ai.philosophy:1600
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!spool.mu.edu!munnari.oz.au!bruce!monu0.cc.monash.edu.au!monu6!john@publications.ccc.monash.edu.au
>From: john@publications.ccc.monash.edu.au (John Wilkins)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books,sci.philosophy.tech,comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Daniel Dennett (was Re: Commenting on the pos
Message-ID: <1991Nov25.021010.21568@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au>
Date: 25 Nov 91 02:10:10 GMT
References: <14920@castle.ed.ac.uk> <1991Nov19.101612.5603@husc3.harvard.edu> <1991Nov20.044837.15035@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au> <1991Nov21.125348.5719@husc3.harvard.edu>
Sender: news@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au (Usenet system)
Organization: Monash University, Melbourne Australia
Lines: 37

In article <1991Nov21.125348.5719@husc3.harvard.edu>, 
zeleny@zariski.harvard.edu (Mikhail Zeleny) writes:
> 
> In article <1991Nov20.044837.15035@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au> 
> john@publications.ccc.monash.edu.au (John Wilkins) writes:
> 
> >In article <1991Nov19.101612.5603@husc3.harvard.edu>, 
> >zeleny@zariski.harvard.edu (Mikhail Zeleny) writes:
> 
> CM:
> >> >By the way, for those who find the ideas of Daniel Dennett interesting,
> >> >there is an encouraging review of his new book by Rorty in the current
> >> >issue of the London Review of Books.
> 
> MZ:
> >> This, of course, assumes that Rorty still has some credibility in the
> >> English-speaking world.  Can a nihilist tell the difference between a
> >> charlatan and an ignoramus?  Would you buy an artificial intelligence, 
> >> or any other form of technology, from a follower of Heidegger?
> 
> JW:
> >Jesus, Misha, you would if they were competent technologists.
> 
> I'm not sure whether you're trying to address my cousin or me; not being
> qualified to speak on his behalf, I'll answer for myself, noting that
> technological competence seems to be at odds with Heideggerian loyalties.
> 
I KNOW Heideggerians - real ones (and I might not buy a used metaphysick
from any of them), and they all drive cars about as well (or as badly) as
I do. Some of them use computers as well as I do. From memory, one was
an engineering student and therefore (since he was passing his course)
was infinitely a better technologist than I. There is no connection of
necessity between a flawed Weltanshauung and technical ability, although
the flawed W may prevent the techne from arising in the first instance.

If any phenomologist came up with an AI that fulfilled the advertising,
yep, I'd buy it. I'd even consider a Platonist's AI 8-).


