Re: Emulation and Stuff

From: 1Z <peterdjones.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2009 05:26:53 -0700 (PDT)

On 14 Aug, 02:18, David Nyman <david.ny....domain.name.hidden> wrote:
> 2009/8/14 Brent Meeker <meeke....domain.name.hidden>:

> If we take 'sufficiently' to the limit I suppose I must agree. But as
> before, in terms of stuffy ontology, any digital emulation - if that's
> what we're still discussing - is a model, not the stuff modelled, and
> hence wouldn't meet any such criterion of sufficiency. If we accept
> for the sake of argument a stuffy TM as equivalent to a stuffy brain,
> then what we're asked to accept here is that - although emulated
> bricks are no good for stuffy house building - stuffy neurons are just
> great for stuffy brain building. But why isn't a stuffy TM running a
> computation just a stuffy TM running a computation: WYSIWYG isn't it?

The standard response is that cogitation is one of a special subset
of tasks where the gap between simualtion and realisation vanishes.
Simulated flying isn't flying, but simuilated chess *is* chess.

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list.domain.name.hidden
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscribe.domain.name.hidden
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Received on Fri Aug 14 2009 - 05:26:53 PDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:16 PST