rwerman@VMS.HUJI.AC.IL (ROBERT WERMAN) (11/30/90)
ous?] Message-Id: <531@shum.UUCP> Date: 29 Nov 90 23:18:53 GMT References: <1990Nov8.205905.1627@oracle.com> <16791@netcom.UUCP> <59261@microso ft.UUCP> <17570@netcom.UUCP> Sender: shum!news Reply-To: rwerman@vms.huji.ac.il Followup-To: sci.bio Organization: The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel Lines: 65 News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1 Apparently-To: post-usenet@ucbvax.berkeley.edu In article <17570@netcom.UUCP>, barry@netcom.UUCP (Kenn Barry) writes... > There's more to life than survival. I don't think love >would be as rewarding as it is, were it reducible to purely >logical components. Rationality is overrated. Logic is only >one minor function of the human brain, and in some ways a >trivial one. We can program machines to be logical, but we >can't (yet, at least) program them to appreciate beauty, to >feel love, or to understand self-sacrifice. ****************************************************************** It is a lovely romantic idea that there is more to life, and especially to mating and love than survival and I subscribe to the sentiment.... If not to the logic. Biologically, adaptations are made with survival as the only winning strategy. Denying it will not make it go away. If we try hard enough, using the esthetic side of our brains, if you will, we probably can see that there are positive esthetic values in survival. Like knowing how it all turns out [there is nothing more frustrating than reading through a long and enthralling novel to find that someone has torn out the last 20 pages]. As to the criterion of programming machines, we can't [yet, at least] program them to reproduce or to engage in adaptive strategies that will ensure [read: maximalize] their survival. Since your unstated assumption appears to be that we are better than machines [we do have good days, I agree, or at least most {many?} of us do], the failure of machines in THAT direction would, according to your argument, indicate to us that repro- duction and survival are indeed superior values. __Bob Werman rwerman@hujivms Jerusalem `