Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!usc!apple!agate!eos!aio.jsc.nasa.gov!smiller
From: smiller@aio.jsc.nasa.gov (Stephen Miller)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: forwarded post
Message-ID: <699@aio.jsc.nasa.gov>
Date: 8 Nov 90 20:45:58 GMT
References: <1990Nov5.181355.24990@watdragon.waterloo.edu> <557@pdxgate.UUCP>
Reply-To: smiller@aio.jsc.nasa.gov.UUCP (Stephen Miller)
Organization: NASA JSC Houston, TX
Lines: 37


as to the (sigh) need for form before content, this is "not necessarily
so"!  it's just that natural language is our (your-mine) medium of 
expression and communication here.  in order to communicate affectively,
we need to follow the rules.  rules of grammar and syntax are some of 
those.  by not knowing (or following) the communication rules, ones 
arouses preliminary questions in some receivers' minds.  (at least in mine.)
    well, it was no big thing, just a minor aggravation.

now to the content (which i think we both agree is the important thing!):
    thank you for your comments.  i do, however, think the changes i'm
talking about  ARE fundamental.  as witness, your comment "has our
emotive base slowed down our scientific understanding?"  [paraphrased.
if i got it wrong, just correct me.]  my point exactly is this:  that we
(western man) has been trying to ignore this aspect of reality, along
with others (such as consciousness) for the last 2000 years or more.
(that is, within the physical and "rigorous" sciences.)  this is because
these areas of life and reality do not fit well into empirical frames,
and because these are the HARD questions.  we are getting close(r) to the 
real tough ones now, the ones philosophy has asked since the greeks and 
before.  (the ones like "what are we?"  "do i exist?" "what is matter
(the universe)?" and "where did i (we) come from?")  our physical sciences
(and life sciences) and now mathematical-comp.sci. and so on have 
progressed to the point where we are confronting these very basic
("fundamental") questions and issues. 
    we are reaching the point where it is no longer viable to think of 
ourselves as supreme, different, or separate.  other mammalian intelligence
shows we should be cautious in thinking we are the smartest, cognitive 
science/AI/our discussion subject is evidence that we are confronting the
question of whether we are different or not (through defining boundaries;
i.e. what things are intelligent, have consciousness, and so on), and 
back to the old modern physics findings to show that we are not really
separable from our world/environment.
    thank you for agreeing with me that we are in a revolution of 
thought here, now.  i think it is evolution.  of human consciousness!

.steve.