[comp.ai.philosophy] ``Perhaps Zen just isn't relevent to AI.''

G.Joly@cs.ucl.ac.uk (Gordon Joly) (03/19/91)

Walter L Rutherford writes:
 > [...]
 > Here are some subjects I can meta-think about (think about thinking about)
 > without actually being able to _truly_ reach them - to my way of thinking.
 >   a) Eternity / timelessness
 >   b) My non-existence
 >   c) Everythings non-existence
 > Will computers be able to REALLY think the unthinkable someday?  How about
 > subjects which we can understand but which computers will always be unable
 > to grasp? Emotions perhaps? Nah - If we can ever get over the first hurdle
 > and get a machine to be aware (of us and its own existence) then it should
 > be able eventually to handle any thought we can handle. Once again species
 > chauvinism says we will one day create a machine "in our own image".
 > Thanks to this group for this group as a trading place (in my case birth
 > place) for ideas.  It has really given me something to think about.
 > 
 > You are now returned to your regularly scheduled program.
 > 
 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
 >       Walter Rutherford
 >        P.O. Box 83273          \ /    Computers are NOT intelligent;
 >    Fairbanks, Alaska 99708    - X -
 >                                / \      they just think they are!
 >    fnwlr1@acad3.alaska.edu
 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------

What is the sound is one hand clapping?

Why does the sound Homer Simspon of singing "Born Under a Bad Sign"
make me laugh?

Choose your own paradigm of reality; I did. Likewise the Tao.

Gordon Joly                                       +44 71 387 7050 ext 3716
Internet: G.Joly@cs.ucl.ac.uk          UUCP: ...!{uunet,ukc}!ucl-cs!G.Joly
Computer Science, University College London, Gower Street, LONDON WC1E 6BT

   "I didn't do it. Nobody saw me do it. You can't prove anything!"