Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.consciousness,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.philosophy.meta,rec.arts.books
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!nntp.club.cc.cmu.edu!miner.usbm.gov!rsg1.er.usgs.gov!jobone!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!sunsite.doc.ic.ac.uk!dcs.gla.ac.uk!unix.brighton.ac.uk!mjs14
From: mjs14@unix.brighton.ac.uk (shute)
Subject: Re: Penrose and Searle (was Re: Roger Penrose's fixed ideas)
Message-ID: <1994Nov24.135351.25743@unix.brighton.ac.uk>
Organization: University of Brighton, UK
References: <CzFr3J.990@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> <CzH78F.4Eq@gpu.utcc.utoronto.ca> <CzqHIB.1nA@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
Distribution: inet
Date: Thu, 24 Nov 1994 13:53:51 GMT
Lines: 35
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu sci.skeptic:96270 comp.ai.philosophy:22579 sci.philosophy.meta:14999

>In article <CzH78F.4Eq@gpu.utcc.utoronto.ca> pindor@gpu.utcc.utoronto.ca (Andrzej Pindor) writes:
>>As someone who defended the TT in this forum, let me once again stress
>>the rationale of this defence: better bird in hand than two in the bush.

In article <CzqHIB.1nA@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> jeff@aiai.ed.ac.uk (Jeff Dalton) writes:
>It's a rather small bird, given that we don't know how to construct
>artificial TT-passers.

>Now, what is the argument for the TT?  That if we can't show it's
>wrong, we should treat it as right?  Why not say we don't yet know
>one way or the other?  After all, it's not like we're going have
>to TT-passers ready tomorrow.  Why the rush?  Why does it *matter*
>that we have this bird in the hand right now?

I am particularly fond of the Newton-Ralphson method.
IMHO it illustrates a deeper lesson, far beyond its use as a technical tool.

It says (to me anyway) that in design, you need to start somewhere.
To a large extent, it doesn't matter where that start is, so long as
you make some sort of start.  (It then goes on to warn that sometimes
it *is* important to avoid some areas as a starting point, for certain
classes of problem, and that yet other classes of problem are completely
untackleable by the tool).

The importance of the TT bird, IMO, is that it does give us *a* start.

OTOH, I concur completely with Jeff that we should never forget
to keep in mind that some starting points do not allow a solution
to converge for certain classes of problem.

(Just my contentless contribution to c.a.p whilst I inwardly digest
yet another enjoyable lunch :-)
-- 

Malcolm SHUTE.         (The AM Mollusc:   v_@_ )        Disclaimer: all
