Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!samsung!munnari.oz.au!bruce!frank
From: frank@bruce.cs.monash.OZ.AU (Frank Breen)
Newsgroups: comp.ai
Subject: Re: Hayes vs. Searle
Keywords: The Quantum Self
Message-ID: <2555@bruce.cs.monash.OZ.AU>
Date: 25 Jun 90 17:24:41 GMT
References: <16875@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> <2629@skye.ed.ac.uk> <3204@se-sd.SanDiego.NCR.COM> <31624@ut-emx.UUCP> <3305@se-sd.SanDiego.NCR.COM> <57800@bbn.BBN.COM>
Organization: Monash Uni. Computer Science, Australia
Lines: 45

In <57800@bbn.BBN.COM> dredick@bbn.com (Barry Kort) writes:

>There are evidently some situations in which the brain's decision
>can be determined by a quantum-mechanical roll of the dice.  The
>parable of the hungry/thirsty donkey caught midway between water
>and food illustrates the need for random tie-breaking when the
>brain's decision-making machinery is precariously balanced on the
>razor's edge of two equally desirable choices.
>  When there is no information on which way
>to turn, we choose one fork at random.  And quantum-mechanical
>events are as good a way as any to cast lots and get on with the
>story.

I don't think that this is the case or that it would be good if it
were.  Also this is not a good example.  The donkey might make a
random choice but a second later it would still be stuck midway
between the two, make another choice which is just as likely to
be different and around we go again.  The solution to the dilemma
of the donkey is the ability to concentrate on a task until it is
finished and this has nothing to do with random decisions or the 
lack of them.

One reason that I don't think it is the case is that when there is
a choice between two posibilities which appear as good as each other
it is very difficult to decide.  This is despite the fact that this
is the case where my decision does not matter very much.  If my brain
was equipped with a random decision maker it would be easy to decide,
but it is not.

One reason that I don't think it would be good to have a random decision
maker in my brain is that often when there are two apparently equally
good choices it is often better to find out more about the two choices
than to make a premature decision.  If I where equipped with a random
decider then it would often pre-empt this process since my decision
would already be made.  One should be able decide to make random decisions
conciously by a non-random decision.

BTW I do think that randomness could well be usefull but it could easily
be destructive to good thinking so it can be dangerous too.  Personally
I am of the opinion that our brains can come up with enough chaos
without being randomised and that there are no coin tossers built in.
Still it could well be the case that such a mechanism exists but I doubt
it would be of great significance.

Frank Breen