From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!cs.utexas.edu!convex!constellation!a.cs.okstate.edu!onstott Tue Mar 24 09:57:59 EST 1992
Article 4658 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Xref: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca comp.ai.philosophy:4658 sci.philosophy.tech:2395
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy,sci.philosophy.tech
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!cs.utexas.edu!convex!constellation!a.cs.okstate.edu!onstott
>From: onstott@a.cs.okstate.edu (ONSTOTT CHARLES OR)
Subject: Re: Causes and Goals
References: <1992Mar21.030527.15609@ccu.umanitoba.ca> <1992Mar21.221618.531@a.cs.okstate.edu> <1992Mar22.185518.12932@neptune.inf.ethz.ch>
Message-ID: <1992Mar22.212839.5347@a.cs.okstate.edu>
Organization: Oklahoma State University, Computer Science, Stillwater
Date: Sun, 22 Mar 92 21:28:39 GMT
Lines: 56

In article <1992Mar22.185518.12932@neptune.inf.ethz.ch> santas@inf.ethz.ch (Philip Santas) writes:
>In article <1992Mar21.221618.531@a.cs.okstate.edu> onstott@a.cs.okstate.edu (ONSTOTT CHARLES OR) writes:
>>
>> A virus is capable of identifying a patient.  Therefore, a virus
>>is also an agent.  The problem still remains:  is a computer the
>>type of agent that can attribute meaning to something.
>
>What does 'identification' has to do with 'attributing meaning'?
  Identification is prerequisit for agency.  Agency is prerequisit
for attributing meaning.  Therefore, those things which can attribute
meaning can identify a patient.  The step is important, I think, because
it helps us determine what the difference between a volitional agent
and an intensional agent might be.  In other words, volition is not
all that is required for intensionality.  Hence, if this
is correct, I could grant volition to Antun Zirdum, and still not
maintain that a computer is an intensional agent.

>
>I think that before we arrive to your problem, some questions must get
>an answer from those who state that a virus is an agent while  a cloud 
>is not:
>
>In what way is the virus identifying a patient?
>
>Why is HCl not capable of identifying biological tissue, since it destroys it?
  This line of questioning seems to be playing on the system/individual 
argument.  I am certain you know why a virus "indentifies" a patient.  But,
it appears that you are trying to reduce the virus to chemical processes
so that one would wonder "how can this bunch of chemicals identify a patient."
Since, I am utilizing the systems stance in this proposition, I am not
addresing this question.  The chemicals themselves can not, like HCl, identify
a patient. On the other hand, the system they form is able to.
  However, you can still reply "What about the cloud as a system of 
chemicals, why can't it identify a patient?"  I don't know if I can answer
this one and make you happy--maybe, because I am not sure yet.  I am sort of
taking for granted that there is a differnce in identifying patientcy 
between a cloud and a virus.  One difference may be that a cloud doesn't seem
to "go after" something.  I imagine, however, that this is not answering
your question; thus, on this point I can't say any more right now.


>Philip Santas

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
-----------------------------------------------------------------------


