Xref: utzoo comp.ai:7959 comp.ai.philosophy:296
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!bu.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!ucsd!pacbell.com!lll-winken!tristan!loren
From: loren@tristan.llnl.gov (Loren Petrich)
Newsgroups: comp.ai,comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: What Has Traditional AI Accomplished
Message-ID: <85493@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV>
Date: 6 Nov 90 00:46:15 GMT
References: <1251@ucl-cs.uucp>
Sender: usenet@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV
Followup-To: comp.ai.philosophy
Organization: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
Lines: 22
Nntp-Posting-Host: tristan.llnl.gov

In article <1251@ucl-cs.uucp> G.Joly@uk.ac.ucl.cs (Gordon Joly) writes:
>
>I still stick to my original thesis.  Penrose has much to say about the
>mind, including the fact that you cannot make a mind in a box. 
>Therefore, he can say little about AI, since he believe the goals to be
>impossible (if consciosness/mind/awareness if the true goal of AI. 

	I guess this discussion belongs in comp.ai.philosophy.

	What "fact" is this?

	And why does he come to this conclusion?

	And what makes him so sure that other people have minds?


$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Loren Petrich, the Master Blaster: loren@sunlight.llnl.gov

Since this nodename is not widely known, you may have to try:

loren%sunlight.llnl.gov@star.stanford.edu