From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!caen!garbo.ucc.umass.edu!dime!chelm.cs.umass.edu!yodaiken Wed Dec 18 16:02:08 EST 1991
Article 2185 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!caen!garbo.ucc.umass.edu!dime!chelm.cs.umass.edu!yodaiken
>From: yodaiken@chelm.cs.umass.edu (victor yodaiken)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Scaled up slug brains
Message-ID: <40746@dime.cs.umass.edu>
Date: 17 Dec 91 13:04:05 GMT
References: <349@idtg.UUCP> <60435@netnews.upenn.edu> <351@idtg.UUCP>
Sender: news@dime.cs.umass.edu
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Lines: 38

In article <351@idtg.UUCP> dow@idtg.UUCP (Keith Dow) writes:
>>>Also, from a physicist's perspective, the fundamental principles of neurons 
>>>are known.  I said this earlier, and it still hasn't sunk into some peoples
>>>heads.  ALL of chemistry is just solutions to Schroedinger's equation.
[...]
>>>Of course the human brain is too complicated to solve using Schroedingers
>>>equation.  But that doesn't mean we have to evoke mystical BS to understand
>>>it.  What evidence is there that we can't determine what the human brain is
>>>doing by measuring the electrical and chemical changes?  I haven't heard
>>>of any that is worth talking about.

This is all fine. But then, we go into the realm of Nostrodamus:

>Fine, then we all agree that the brain is a machine which will soon
>be understood. 

Soon? Based on what? Your horoscope readings?

>That all questions about the brain can be explained
>by the chemical and electrical interactions happening between the
>ears.

Follows similarly (ie. not at all). There is no evidence to suggest that
human thought is possible without the operation of human bodies. Can
language develop without vocal chords (even in the deaf)? I don't know, but
you don't either. Is there a major hormonal component to the development
of thought? Is the interplay between movement and sensation key to
development of brains? .... 

>Also, that a machine will eventually be
>built that does every thing the human mind does, but much better.

Is this from some sci-fi novel? is it based on a religious belief? is
it merely a funding ploy?






