A Beautiful Schizophrenia [was: Re: AI Eureka!]

Jim Balter jqb at exodus.net
Wed Jun 5 15:02:46 EST 2002

stremler at rohan.sdsu.edu wrote:
> In alt.folklore.computers Jim Balter <jqb at exodus.net> wrote:
> > stremler at rohan.sdsu.edu wrote:
> >>
> [snip]
> >> "Got them to"? What, was there torture?
> > There's usually psychological torture involved.
> Then the attorneys would seem to have failed in their duties in
> a rather significant way, as well as the police.

Gee, really?  Imagine that.  Of course it could also mean
that lawyers aren't able to convince judges that police
use techniques that it is well documented that they do use.
> [snip]
> > What, aren't "NYPD Blue" or "Law and Order" available in your area?
> That would require an investment of slack-jawed attention paid to
> the idiot box.

No, no attention is required.

> My slack-jawed attention time is reserve entirely
> for usenet, thankyouverymuch.

Yes, it shows.
> > Such shows dramatize this sort of thing all the time, so even someone
> > with your lack of imagination and insight should have a clue.
> I'm not the one watching TV to learn about the so-called 'real world'.

*I* don't need TV to get clues because I actually read the related
litertature, but since you obviously don't, I suggested that as consistent
with your evident intellectual capacity.

> Perhaps you should reevaluate just who is lacking imagination, insight,
> and clues here.

*You* are the one who claims to "just wonder what people are thinking".

> >> Perhaps "they" are right -- video games do have a detrimental impact
> >> on youth: it makes 'em stupid.
> >
> > What's your excuse?
> Apparently an excess of integrity.

There's certainly no sign of that.

> But you surely wouldn't know anything
> about that, would you?

Well, yes, I would, actually.

> That's not something you typically develop from
> emulating parts of the vegetable kingdom while bathed in a soft phosphor
> glow.

Your lack of integrity is evidenced by your attempt to
"poison the well" -- suggesting that anyone who has ever watched TV
is defined by watching TV.  But that's an error in logic,
like mistaking "or" for "exclusive or".

<J Q B>

More information about the Neur-sci mailing list