k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net
Tue Nov 11 17:46:20 EST 2003
"Michael Olea" <oleaj at sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:BBD69100.12C8%oleaj at sbcglobal.net...
| in article lnd2rv0k34b2sp117g8sbjl5mtu5e6acci at 4ax.com, r norman at
| rsn_ at _comcast.net wrote on 11/11/03 11:27 AM:
| > On Tue, 11 Nov 2003 19:14:13 GMT, "Dio" <dadaismo at tin.it> wrote:
| >> [...]
| > That is, the brain IS a kind of machine
| > already, so yes, consciousness can
| > be produced by a machine. And that
| > means that is could also be produced
| > by a non-biological machine.
| The last sentence does not necessarily
| follow - it is a logical possibility that
| whatever it is that makes a machine
| "non-biological" also makes it
| incapable of consciousness. I am not
| advocating that position, just
| pointing out a flaw in the reasoning.
One has to take the last two sentences of
R. Norman's post as a unit. The 2nd-to-last
sentence implies "biological machine".
More information about the Neur-sci