Brain, Behaviour and Extensionalism
lesterDELzick at worldnet.att.net
Wed Apr 14 10:31:24 EST 2004
On Tue, 13 Apr 2004 18:03:25 -0400, Wolf Kirchmeir
<wolfekir at sympatico.ca> in comp.ai.philosophy wrote:
>Lester Zick wrote:
>> On Tue, 13 Apr 2004 08:27:25 -0400, Wolf Kirchmeir
>> <wolfekir at sympatico.ca> in comp.ai.philosophy wrote:
>>>Curt Welch wrote:
>>>>A computer program is a specification for how to build a machine. It is
>>>>"exactly" like the blueprint for a car.
>>>There is a fundamental difference between blueprints and programs. Given
>>>a blueprint, if you don't know how to build car, the blueprint is merely
>>>a pretty picture. Given a program, then if you can follow the
>>>instructions, you can build the car even if you don't know what car is.
>> In this analogy ". . . if you don't know how to build car . . ." means
>> exactly the same as the expression ". . . if you can follow the
>> instructions . . ." except that the language of each is different. It
>> is true that the latter in turing mechanics is more general than the
>> former in blueprint mechanics. But each represents a compilation of
>> instructions which if you know how to follow you can build a car.
>> Regards - Lester
>The written program is a set of instructions. The blueprint is not. That
>should be obvious to a programmer (which you have claimed to be. Maybe
>you were just a code writer.... Hah!)
The written program is only data: a translated set of binary ones and
zeros. A blueprint is only data: a set of lines, numbers, and letters.
If you can do as bid by ones and zeros you may someday be able to do
as bid by lines, numbers, and letters. Those who can do: those who
can't . . .
>The confusion of blue <> program has also caused major misunderstanding
Regards - Lester
More information about the Neur-sci