ekrodomos.net> 40cc34e8   
   8a32aec9   
   From: joss@nospampleasewerebritish.nekrodomos.net   
      
   On Sat, 19 Jun 2004 02:26:36 -0600, ghost wrote:   
      
      
      
   >   
   > Searle sounds like a machine-bigot. Sorry, but he does. Utterly denying   
   > the possiblity of something that we haven't even really begun to explore   
   > shuts doors that may need to be opened to understand the concept fully.   
   >   
      
   I agree here. In another thread you replied to my Nexus6 comment by saying   
   "but weren't Nexus6 biological". Why, if something is constructed from   
   cells does it gain the ability to be conscious? Why is it valid to assume   
   that a biological entity which behaves in a certain way is conscious, but   
   a mechanical entity which behaves in the same way is not conscious? What   
   if we created a simulation using artificially created biological cells?   
   Would they be conscious?   
      
   The consciousness argued by Searle and other weak AI proponents is that   
   consciousness is, effectively, like "spirit". I call upon Occam's razor   
   here: if consciousness cannot be measured or observed except by effects   
   that can be simulated then there is no reason for it to be in our models.   
      
   Unfortunately, this is an area that is kind of like religious debate.   
   Without a way to prove that consciousness is possessed by something or   
   not, it's just a matter of belief.   
      
   I'm a consciousness-atheist.   
      
   --   
   -----------------------------------------------------------   
   Joss Wright   
   Computer Science Department     http://www.pseudonymity.net   
   York University              http://www.cs.york.ac.uk/~joss   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)