Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!know!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!ubc-cs!alberta!herald.usask.ca!telepro!oliphant From: oliphant@telepro.UUCP (Mike Oliphant) Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy Subject: Re: Testing for machine consciousness Message-ID: Date: 27 Oct 90 14:13:36 GMT References: <3499@media-lab.MEDIA.MIT.EDU> <1990Oct4.154655.23004@canon.co.uk> <7@tdatirv.UUCP> <1990Oct8.120927.8648@canon.co.uk> <21@tdatirv.UUCP> <1990Oct12.074325.688@canon.co.uk> <31@tdatirv.UUCP> <1990Oct16.084022.7279@canon.co.uk> Lines: 26 In article <1990Oct16.084022.7279@canon.co.uk> rjf@canon.co.uk writes: >I'd claim that consciousness cannot be handled objectively. There can be >no objective evidence for it, or definition of it. I would argue that the key issue is not to classify things as being subjective or objective, but rather to try to understand why the subjective exists at all and to try to figure out just what the heck it is. To me, the problematic aspect of consciousness is that it is so inextricably linked to having a "point of view". I want to know why I have such a "point of view" and where it comes from. Telling me that it is subjective and I cannot objectively investigate it doesn't help any. This is the traditional cop-out of labelling something that you do not understand and then proclaiming the issue to either be resolved or unresolvable. -- Mike Oliphant UUCP: alberta!herald!telepro!oliphant Internet: oliphant@telepro.uucp FidoNet: (1:140/91) - ZMH only * * Call TelePro, the development system for DIALOG Professional * * Phone: +1 306 249 2352 2400/9600/14400 bps HST * +1 306 652 2084 300/1200/2400 bps * FidoNet: (1:140/90) *