From: Gene McAloon 

On Mon, 31 May 2004 20:18:44 -0400, "Geo."  wrote:

>"Gene McAloon"  wrote in message
>news:uncnb0t4jpo228rvsnj67n4utlhjkqo86i{at}4ax.com...
>
>> On the contrary, it is the writers understanding the basic flaw in the
>concept.
>> No matter how well or fast a machine can utilize information, the one thing
>it
>> cannot do is exercise judgment.
>
>That's pretty funny coming from a biological machine.. 
>
>I see no reason why we can't program a machine to evaluate a situation the
same
>way we evaluate it. All that's required is that we first figure out how we
>evaluate it. Consider this, routers make decisions about information flow all
>the time and yet your post seems to reach me just fine. It's a crude example
>but the concept is there. A human is just a complex system, each part has a
>function and can be monitored just like a network can be monitored, and a set
>of rules can be applied to keep the system functional.
>
>Geo.
>
Sorry Geo, none of the above is true or even begins to be true. The
mechanistic view of humans is old, long ago discredited bullshit.

Except on the most simplistic basis possible, there can be no valid
comparison between how a router works and how a human mind works. At that,
we don't know exactly how the mind works, so how are to going to program a
machine to operate in the same way?

The kind of machines, artificial intelligence if you like, you have in mind
could exist only if we understood much more about ourselves than we do or
are ever likely to do. I wouldn't care to hold my breath waiting for that
to happen and by the time it does we probably will no longer even require
machines of any kind.

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5