Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site ccivax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!mgnetp!ihnp4!mhuxl!ulysses!unc!mcnc!decvax!ittvax!dcdwest!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!hplabs!hao!seismo!rochester!ritcv!ccivax!band
From: band@ccivax.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.ai
Subject: Re: Mind and Brain
Message-ID: <171@ccivax.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 22-Jun-84 08:41:28 EDT
Article-I.D.: ccivax.171
Posted: Fri Jun 22 08:41:28 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 27-Jun-84 09:01:52 EDT
References: <954@eosp1.UUCP>
Organization: CCI Telephony Systems Group,  Roch, NY
Lines: 31

In reference to Mr. Robison's comments:

Is it possible that "intuition" is the word we
use to explain what cannot be explained more
formally or logically?

I'm thinking of the explanation of evolution
based on Natural Selection.  An explanation based
on probability is NOT an explanation at all.
It is an admission that there is no logical or
formal explanation possible.  Of course, we
still accept evolution as a fact of life, but
we don't have any mechanical (or dynamical in the
sense of physics) model for it.

Perhaps the same is true of our experience of
intuition.  Something is going on when we have
a flash of insight, but we don't have any
dynamical model that can be used for prediction.

I think that Mr. Robison is correct when he says
that we just don't know much about how our
mind/brain system works.  We need to keep asking
any and all questions that come to mind (pun not
intended) -- that's what science is all about.
-- 

	Bill Anderson

        ...!{ {ucbvax | decvax}!allegra!rlgvax }!ccivax!band