[Neuroscience] Re: Philosophical Foundations of Neuroscience

Matthew Kirkcaldie via neur-sci%40net.bio.net (by m.kirkcaldie At removethis.unsw.edu.au)
Sun Dec 3 20:29:08 EST 2006


In article <sWJch.7054$wc5.3556 At newssvr25.news.prodigy.net>,
 Michael Olea <oleaj At sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> Matthew Kirkcaldie wrote:
> > ...  It's a type of thinking
> > which is plausible but erroneous, in fact I would say that the entire
> > "strong AI" discipline rests on this kind of erroneous attempt to
> > isolate thought from its physical substrate.
> 
> Are you suggesting that "an entire community of intellects [is] missing an 
> obvious point?"

OW!  Got me!

You're correct, I was employing the kind of sweeping generalisation I 
objected to just a few hundred characters earlier. But, in my defence, I 
didn't try to use it to sell a book.

Apologies to the AI community, very few of whom actually do think that 
way.  I suspect Kurzweil does, which is why I loathe his ideas so 
irrationally.  Mind you, "strong AI" is pretty much a straw man used by 
the AI researchers I've spoken to as well, so maybe I just insulted thin 
air.

Thanks Michael.  I see you are more awake than I am!

         MK.

-- 
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com



More information about the Neur-sci mailing list