Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!bloom-beacon!gatech!purdue!i.cc.purdue.edu!j.cc.purdue.edu!pur-ee!uiucdcs!uiucdcsm!channic
From: channic@uiucdcsm.cs.uiuc.edu
Newsgroups: comp.ai
Subject: Re: AIList V6 #86 - Philosophy
Message-ID: <3200016@uiucdcsm>
Date: 3 May 88 16:04:00 GMT
References: <1579@pt.cs.cmu.edu>
Lines: 52
Nf-ID: #R:pt.cs.cmu.edu:1579:uiucdcsm:3200016:000:2792
Nf-From: uiucdcsm.cs.uiuc.edu!channic    May  3 11:04:00 1988




In his article Brian Yamuchi (yamauchi@speech2.cs.cmu.edu) writes:
> /* ---------- "Re: AIList V6 #86 - Philosophy" ---------- */
> In article <368693.880430.MINSKY@AI.AI.MIT.EDU>, MINSKY@AI.AI.MIT.EDU (Marvin Minsky) writes:
> > Yamauchi, Cockton, and others on AILIST have been discussing freedom
> > of will as though no AI researchers have discussed it seriously.  May
> > I ask you to read pages 30.2, 30.6 and 30.7 of The Society of Mind.  I
> > claim to have a good explanation of the free-will phenomenon.
> 
> Actually, I have read The Society of Mind, where Minsky writes:
> 
> | Everything that happens in our universe is either completely determined
> | by what's already happened in the past or else depends, in part, on
> | random chance.  Everything, including that which happens in our brains,
> | depends on these and only on these :
> |
> | A set of fixed, deterministic laws.	A purely random set of accidents.
> |
> | There is no room on either side for any third alternative.
> 
I see plenty of room -- my own subjective experience.  I make mental
decisions which are not random and are not completely determined (although
certainly influenced) by past determinism.  Minsky wondered why his
explanation seems to have eluded philosophers of the past.  I am not
surprised because evidently he is just being swept away out of control
in an entirely random or totally determined universe.  The philosophers
of the past, like myself, were probably like me -- intelligent, free will
sentient beings.  Are these philosphers and myself in the minority?
I think not, but I am surprised that such views constitute RESPECTED,
let alone, PUBLISHED material on the subject.  Certainly this objectivist
viewpoint helps the discipline of AI:  people (i.e. funding agences) will
be more likely to believe that a machine can be intelligent if intelligence
can be reduced to a set of purely deterministic laws.  But this BEGS THE
QUESTION of intelligent machines in the worst way.  Show me the deterministic
laws that create mind, Dr. Minsky, then I will believe there is no free will.
Otherwise, you are trying to refute an undeniable human experience.
Do you believe your career was merely the result of some bizarre genetic
combination or pure chance?

The attack is over.  The following is a plea to all AI researchers.  Please
do not try to persuade anyone, especially impressionable students, that s\he
does not have free will.  Everyone has the ability to choose to bring peace
to his or her own life and to the rest of society, and has the ability to
MAKE A DIFFERENCE in the world.  Free will should not be compromised for the
mere prospect of creating an intelligent machine.

Tom Channic
University of Illinois
channic@uiucdcs.cs.uiuc.edu
{decvax|ihnp4}!pur-ee!uiucdcs!channic