Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!nntp.club.cc.cmu.edu!miner.usbm.gov!rsg1.er.usgs.gov!stc06.ctd.ornl.gov!fnnews.fnal.gov!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!cs.utexas.edu!utnut!utgpu!pindor
From: pindor@gpu.utcc.utoronto.ca (Andrzej Pindor)
Subject: Re: Penrose and human mathematical capabilities
Message-ID: <DBKGvL.Gtr@gpu.utcc.utoronto.ca>
Organization: UTCC Public Access
References: <3t6tcv$nca@netnews.upenn.edu> <3torlc$8ho@bell.maths.tcd.ie> <jqbDBI3sH.J50@netcom.com> <3tra4b$em9@netnews.upenn.edu>
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 1995 19:30:57 GMT
Lines: 24
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.ai.philosophy:29957 sci.logic:12205

In article <3tra4b$em9@netnews.upenn.edu>,
Matthew P Wiener <weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu> wrote:
>In article <jqbDBI3sH.J50@netcom.com>, jqb@netcom (Jim Balter) writes:
.................
>>(which is why it took evolution so long to produce something that
>>could do it.)
>
>Who says evolution used an AI paradigm?

I am not sure what you see as the "AI paradigm", but are you implying that 
the process of evolution cannot be modelled using computers (digitall ones)?
I am not saying that it can, but I do not see any evidence that it cannot
either. So far the evolutionary processes seem to be quite classical.
Does Goedel theorem imply anything here? Or do you know of any other
theorem which "proves" that this is impossible?
>-- 
>-Matthew P Wiener (weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu)

Andrzej
-- 
Andrzej Pindor                        The foolish reject what they see and 
University of Toronto                 not what they think; the wise reject
Instructional and Research Computing  what they think and not what they see.
pindor@gpu.utcc.utoronto.ca                           Huang Po
