Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!lyra.csx.cam.ac.uk!sunsite.doc.ic.ac.uk!dcs.gla.ac.uk!unix.brighton.ac.uk!mjs14
From: mjs14@unix.brighton.ac.uk (shute)
Subject: Re: Strong AI and consciousness
Message-ID: <1994Nov29.114248.5425@unix.brighton.ac.uk>
Organization: University of Brighton, UK
References: <CzsKqx.Gon@gpu.utcc.utoronto.ca> <Czu6C4.30z@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> <CzzrLH.93H@gpu.utcc.utoronto.ca>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 1994 11:42:48 GMT
Lines: 16

In article <CzzrLH.93H@gpu.utcc.utoronto.ca> pindor@gpu.utcc.utoronto.ca (Andrzej Pindor) writes:
>??? This is completly different if you think that something has specific
>properties and you are wrong. What we were discussing is a situation when
>something is identified by its properties and then, by introducing more 
>properties, the class is divided into two or more classes. The name of the
>original class is now used only to one subclass. Claiming that the previous
>use of the class name was on occasion wrong (because applied to members of
>a subclass, which is later given a different name) is (a Platonic) nonsense.

Changing the example, were the Greeks wrong to claim that there are
four elements, when we now know that there are 92 (natural ones)?
(Interesting, though, that we recognise the states of matter to be
solids, liquids, gases, and energy(=m.c^2).
-- 

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