From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!cs.utexas.edu!convex!constellation!a.cs.okstate.edu!onstott Mon Mar  9 18:34:57 EST 1992
Article 4237 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!cs.utexas.edu!convex!constellation!a.cs.okstate.edu!onstott
>From: onstott@a.cs.okstate.edu (ONSTOTT CHARLES OR)
Subject: Re: Intelligence and Understanding
References: <1992Mar1.213842.6333@neptune.inf.ethz.ch> <1992Mar1.235957.20999@a.cs.okstate.edu> <1992Mar2.110650.13158@neptune.inf.ethz.ch>
Message-ID: <1992Mar4.025014.13512@a.cs.okstate.edu>
Organization: Oklahoma State University, Computer Science, Stillwater
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 92 02:50:14 GMT
Lines: 64

In article <1992Mar2.110650.13158@neptune.inf.ethz.ch> santas@inf.ethz.ch (Philip Santas) writes:
>
>In article <1992Mar1.235957.20999@a.cs.okstate.edu> onstott@a.cs.okstate.edu (ONSTOTT CHARLES OR) writes:
>> santas@inf.ethz.ch (Philip Santas) writes:
>>> onstott@a.cs.okstate.edu (ONSTOTT CHARLES OR) writes:
>>>>
>>>>   Meaningfulness comes from volition.
>>>
>>>This is just a definition, which for the sake of the argument I can
>>>temporarily accept.
>>>
>>>>   The system must have volition--in turn which means that it is
>>>>   dynamic and creative.
>>>
>>>What do you mean by creative? Are electrons dynamic and creative?
>>  The system is creative..  Electrons may not be; but the system composed of
>>them may be.
>
>But what does it mean creative?
   Read literature--there is creativity.  Listen to music--there is 
creativity.  Surely this question is a joke.  Copping out like this does
not vindicate the machine.  Perhaps feedback, both internal and external, 
aid in creativity.


>
>>>>   A computer does not have volition.  A computer does not have volition
>>>>   because, even as a system, its behavior is presecribed and thus
>>>>   predetermined.
>>>
>>>Possibilities for hardware and software errors always exist.
>>  But this is random and not under control.  Pure randomnimity is not
>>volitional.
>
>If volition is under control, then I do not see how cannot it be
>presecribed and predetermined.
  Huh?  Volition isn't under control--it is influenced.  Randomnimity
denies volition, at a certain level,  but does not imply predetermination.


>
>>>>   Predetermination denies volition which in turn denies meaning which
>>>>   in turn denies understanding.
>
>But you seem to say that volition is predetermined.
>Your arguments are still not valid.
  Volition is not predetermined--it is influenced.  A computer, on the
other hand, has not volition even though certain outputs may not be
predictable(even though, with rigourous enough analysis they can always
be).

BCnya,
  Charles O. Onstott, III

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles O. Onstott, III                  P.O. Box 2386
Undergraduate in Philosophy              Stillwater, Ok  74076
Oklahoma State University                onstott@a.cs.okstate.edu


"The most abstract system of philosophy is, in its method and purpose, 
nothing more than an extremely ingenious combination of natural sounds."
                                              -- Carl G. Jung
-----------------------------------------------------------------------


