Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!rutgers!att!alberta!calgary!vaxa.UCalgary.CA!falkg
From: falkg@vaxa.UCalgary.CA (Geoffrey Falk)
Newsgroups: comp.ai
Subject: free will
Message-ID: <1478@cs-spool.calgary.UUCP>
Date: 5 Jun 89 15:24:49 GMT
Sender: news@calgary.UUCP
Reply-To: falkg@vaxa.UCalgary.CA (Geoffrey Falk)
Distribution: na
Organization: U. of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Lines: 27
Disclaimer:  The stuff here is just my OPINION.

I beg to disagree with much of what has been said here.  Although it can never
be known what free will is, it obviously exists (at least for me.)  And,
since I am a strict believer in a universe governed by physical (secular)
phenomena alone, I have formed what I believe may be the only explanation
for consciousness.

Intelligence may well be exhibited by some machine of the future.  It may well
be possible to create a deterministic software/silicon thing which can pass
the Turing test with flying colours.  However, it is my FIRM belief that no
entity whose behaviour is strictly determined (i.e. by a piece of coded soft-
ware) can actually possess a consciousness.  It is therefore my conclusion
that an actual "thinking" machine lies in the exploitation of some other
physical phenomenon by which an element of nondeterminism can be injected.
Such is the nature of the human brain.

I suggest that the way to achieve this, is by utilizing quantum random effects
in neural microcircuitry.

Although it will always be impossible to strictly prove that any entity has
a consciousness, it is evidently possible for consciousness to take place.
The Turing test reduces to another moronic demonstration of the Other Minds
problem.  The evidence for consciousness will be in the demonstration of
behaviour that was not envisioned by the creators of the system.

Geoffrey Falk
(falkg@vaxa.cpsc.UCalgary.CA)
Student, U. of C.