Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.consciousness,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.philosophy.meta,rec.arts.books
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!howland.reston.ans.net!torn!newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!oz
From: oz@nexus.yorku.ca (ozan s. yigit)
Subject: tt, comp.ai.phil etc...
In-Reply-To: jeff@aiai.ed.ac.uk's message of Wed, 23 Nov 1994 19:13:27 GMT
Message-ID: <OZ.94Nov27201942@nexus.yorku.ca>
Sender: news@newshub.ccs.yorku.ca (USENET News System)
Organization: The Electric Skillet
References: <39posv$mr0@nnrp.ucs.ubc.ca> <CzFr3J.990@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
	<OZ.94Nov18233146@nexus.yorku.ca> <CzqIqG.2AM@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
Distribution: inet
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 1994 01:19:42 GMT
Lines: 35
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu sci.skeptic:96486 comp.ai.philosophy:22724 sci.philosophy.meta:15070

Jeff Dalton [on TT]:

   >fiercely defended where?

   Well, in comp.ai.phil, just for instance.

i think you are exaggerating. there has certainly been some fierce
exchanges in comp.ai.phil, but i cannot recall one in defence of the TT.
[i may still have several years worth of archives somewhere in case you
wish to prove me wrong :)]. in any case, it seems to me that this supposed
"fierce defence of TT" is being held against every pro-ai poster in
comp.ai.philosophy, even if they have never offered an opinion on this
matter. i think this is unfair. 

   >the only actual defense is an article by dennett. 

   Really?  Where did he defend it, BTW?  (I have no Dennett handy.)

Daniel Dennett, "Can machines think?"  in (M. Shafto, ed) _How We Know_.
Harper & Row, 1985.

   >give some real references to the literature. 

   Maybe I'll try to start noting them.

that would be appreciated.

oz
---
Never speak more clearly than you | electric: oz@nexus.yorku.ca
think.         - Jeremy Bernstein | or oz@sni.ca [416] 449 9449




