From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!unix.cis.pitt.edu!pitt!geb Mon Dec 16 11:02:19 EST 1991
Article 2162 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!unix.cis.pitt.edu!pitt!geb
>From: geb@dsl.pitt.edu (gordon e. banks)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Scaled up slug brains
Message-ID: <12723@pitt.UUCP>
Date: 16 Dec 91 12:46:38 GMT
References: <40659@dime.cs.umass.edu> <12709@pitt.UUCP> <40677@dime.cs.umass.edu>
Sender: news@cs.pitt.edu
Organization: Decision Systems Laboratory, Univ. of Pittsburgh, PA.
Lines: 36

In article <40677@dime.cs.umass.edu> yodaiken@chelm.cs.umass.edu (victor yodaiken) writes:

>Now you seem to be retreating from your support of Friesen's strong
>AI position. If all you are claiming is that "mind" is a product of
>some physical phenomena connected with the brain, then we have no argument.
>On the other hand, a claim that "mind" is a "computation" or a claim that
>the fundamental principles of thought are understood, or a claim that
>human minds can be characterized in the same way as the operation of slug
>nervous systems can be characterized, but with just more connections, then 
>we disagree.

Perhaps we disagree on the meaning of the word "computation".  I consider
that neural networks (real ones) being activated by internal and
external stimuli are likely the basis for our "minds".  If this is
a computation, then I guess I agree with Friesen.  The fact that
animals exhibit many of the same types of behaviors we do and
have similar or nearly identical neural structures that can be studied
and characterized, makes me more confident in the belief.  But I'm not
saying it is a proven case.  I'm very interested in hearing about other
theories, but so far haven't found one as compelling as the neuron doctrine.
Using the tools of science, we have been making steady progress in
understanding neurobiology, and have yet to run into any "stone walls"
that would make me think there is some unknown principle out there that
we can't fathom.  I also think evolution is a very strong case and have
a hard time seeing how there was suddenly a catastrophic change where
the parent used one form of neurobiology and the child suddenly uses
another.  If we use phonon pumping in our neurons, it is a good bet
that the worms do too.



-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gordon Banks  N3JXP      | "I have given you an argument; I am not obliged
geb@cadre.dsl.pitt.edu   |  to supply you with an understanding." -S.Johnson
----------------------------------------------------------------------------


