Re: [sl4] Re: goals of AI

From: Matt Paul (
Date: Mon Nov 30 2009 - 13:37:28 MST

I find it interesting that when I explained my ideas in terms of
dimensions to give an example of why I wasn't speaking of a soul, you
did not engage. You seem to only respond when you can attack someone.
Give a decent explanation that you can't attack, it shuts you down,
which tells me you are more of a grumpy troll than an intellectual.
That tells me you probably don't have much productive thought to

I know, I know. I'm a medival idiot that thinks everything is a soul.
Your record is scratched and skipping dude.

On Nov 30, 2009, at 2:01 PM, "John K Clark" <>

> On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 "Luke" <> said:
>> if we want to talk about a "ghost in the machine", we could posit
>> that higher-dimensional signals which are too small to be measured
>> except by a
>> chaotic process could be significant determinants of the outputs of
>> human
>> brain processes.
> New Physics should only be conjured up as a absolute last resort as
> when
> there is just no alternative, such as when it became obvious that it
> was
> impossible to reconcile Maxwell's equations with observed Black Body
> Radiation; the only way out was the quantum. There is no need to
> invent
> new physics (at least not yet) to explain intelligence, we've made
> excellent progress duplicating it artificially over the last 50 years
> without doing so. And your idea explains nothing it just kicks the
> problem upstairs; the key to everything is mysterious signals from
> another dimension without even an attempt made to explain how those
> signals originated in that other dimension. There is another word for
> all that, the soul. I don't believe in the soul.
>> If you take Jim's brain out of his body and hook it into
>> a robot body, that robot is NOT going to act like Jim unless you
>> get the
>> robot body to feed it the same patterns of hormones.
> Obviously.
>> How would you do that
> Hormones are just signals that have a very small informational content
> and travel extraordinarily slowly, if electronics can send information
> in gargantuan quantities at the speed of light down a fiber optic
> cable
> I fail to understand why hormone smoke signals would stump it.
>> If humans are machines, then isn't the existence of humans a trivial
>> proof that human intelligence can be recreated in a machine?
> Yes but most people, even most people on transhuman lists believe in
> the
> soul and do not think humans are machines, they even think that to be
> called a reductionist is an insult. I don't.
> John K Clark
> --
> John K Clark
> --
> - The professional email service

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:01:05 MDT