Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!aplcen!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!batcomputer!cornell!oravax!ian
From: ian@oravax.UUCP (Ian Sutherland)
Newsgroups: comp.ai
Subject: Re: Can Machines Think?
Message-ID: <1329@oravax.UUCP>
Date: 8 Feb 90 05:13:36 GMT
References: <1037@ra.stsci.edu> <6902@cbnewsh.ATT.COM> <1995@moscom.UUCP> <1328@oravax.UUCP> <621@berlioz.nsc.com>
Reply-To: ian@oravax.odyssey.UUCP (Ian Sutherland)
Distribution: comp.ai
Organization: Odyssey Research Associates, Ithaca, New York
Lines: 11

In article <621@berlioz.nsc.com> andrew@dtg.nsc.com (Lord Snooty @ The Giant Poisoned Electric Head       ) writes:
-
-If we substitute "universe" for "chinese room", and "the laws of physics"
-for "the rules of chinese language", are we to conclude that the cosmos
-is a conscious entity?

Why is this absurd (as your "Summary" line suggests)?
-- 
Ian Sutherland		ian%oravax.uucp@cu-arpa.cs.cornell.edu

Sans Peur