From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!ames!haven.umd.edu!mimsy!harwood Wed Dec 18 16:02:36 EST 1991
Article 2231 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!ames!haven.umd.edu!mimsy!harwood
>From: harwood@umiacs.umd.edu (David Harwood)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Scaled up slug brains
Message-ID: <45103@mimsy.umd.edu>
Date: 18 Dec 91 15:03:50 GMT
References: <12708@pitt.UUCP> <44970@mimsy.umd.edu> <1991Dec18.071959.4921@daisy.ee.und.ac.za>
Sender: news@mimsy.umd.edu
Organization: UMIACS, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742
Lines: 17

In article <1991Dec18.071959.4921@daisy.ee.und.ac.za> mclarke@daisy.ee.und.ac.za (Matthew Clarke) writes:

>Likewise, I see no problem (*) accepting that there is a continuum of brain
>complexity from lower to higher animals, while still maintaining that humans
>have minds while sea-slugs do not. There is no point in trying to draw
>a quantitative line when the difference is qualitative. 
>
>(*) By "no problem" I mean no philosophical problem, there is of course the
>empirical problem that brain complexity of various animals does NOT form a
>continuum, but a discrete series with some (rather large) holes.
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
	Eg - some animals have color vision. There is no evolutionary
"scaling-up" of nervous systems with eyes having 1 pair of cones, 2 pair,
3 pair, ..., N pair. No- they have genetically coded "color vision"
cells and "circuitry", or they don't.




