Re: [sl4] Re: goals of AI

From: Mike Dougherty (
Date: Tue Dec 01 2009 - 06:10:45 MST

On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 2:30 AM, John K Clark <> wrote:
[a bunch of stuff in a aggravated ranting style...]

I wonder if you have a strong opinion about this thread or if everything you
write sounds this way?

I think the idea of another dimension was not intended as support for the
soul you so vehemently dislike, but the implication that there may be
variables we haven't yet detected. Perhaps there is a formula that would
provide insight into "how the universe works" but we are currently at a
point where some of the variables have been negated or that we've only
imagined a simplified case. example: high school physics teachers explain
oscillators, but leave damping for "advanced" students. parabolic
trajectories are almost always studied at first in an idealized vacuum so
windspeed and air resistance do not complicate the simplified form of the
equation. I'm not saying we should shift responsibility for how stuff works
to another dimension, a soul or an ineffable god - but I think it hubris to
believe we already know all that can be known. If yours is a case for only
refinement of understanding of the data already gathered without any
possibility for new knowledge from yet uneplored frontiers of science - then
I can appreciate why your tone is frequently ... miserable. :)

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