[MD] A.I.

[plattholden at gmail.com]

On 20 Jul 2010 at 13:44, Ham Priday wrote:


Magnus, Platt, All --



[Platt]:
> Those interested in A.I. will find a recent article by David Gelernter 
> (who
> needs no introduction to A.I. fans) at:
>
> http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/gelernter10.1/gelernter10.1_index.html
>
> He points out that human thinking involves a lot more than reason. Perhaps
> you'll find his ideas helpful in understanding the MOQ's intellectual 
> level.

I don't think a professor of computer science is the best authority on human 
thinking.  However, for those who don't read this article, this paragraph 
sums up Gelernter's argument:

"Human beings and animals are conscious and, as the philosopher John Searle 
has argued (in effect), a scientist must assume that consciousness results 
from a certain chemical, physical structure-just as photosynthesis results 
from the chemistry of plants.  You can't program your laptop or cellphone to 
transform carbon dioxide into sugar; computers are made of the wrong stuff 
for photosynthesis-and the wrong stuff for consciousness."

As I've said many times, the fallacy in relegating human functions like 
consciousness, intellection, conceptualization, and sensibility to a 
supra-human domain or level is that it makes man little more than a robot of 
natural evolution.  Of course we can build a machine that duplicates the 
function of a thinking robot. In his own way, Pirsig's positing of the 
universe as a "moral system" favors A.I development.  His MoQ reduces 
sentient subjects to mere "quality patterns" driven by nature's universe 
rather than by their own rationalized value-sensibility.  The consequence of 
this worldview will be a collective society that dismisses individual 
freedom, creativity, and personal fulfillment as outmoded egoistic "static 
patterns".


Hi Ham,

I think you have a point there, in fact, a couple of points. Gelerntner, like 
other science types, is sure that mind emerges magically from matter. Big 
error, but locked into SOM metaphysics, no other conclusion is possible. Pirsig 
flirts with the same assumption but saves the MOQ with his indefinable DQ that 
trumps SOM's mind-from-matter value. 

[Ham]
We're halfway there already, aren't we Platt?

More than halfway I'd say with socialists Obama, Pelosi and Reid in charge,  
backed by their like-minded co-conspirators piling on their liberty-killing 
regulations and spending us into oblivion. 

Best regards and higher hopes for betterness,
Ham

I join you in those sentiments.  
Platt