Re: belief, faith, truth

From: Brent Meeker <meekerdb.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2006 10:12:08 -0800

daddycaylor.domain.name.hidden wrote:
> Jeanne Houston wrote:
>
>> I am a layperson who reads these discussions out of avid interest,
>
> and I
>
>> hope that someone will answer a question that I would like to ask in
>
> order
>
>> to enhance my own understanding.
>> There is an emphasis on AI running through these discussions, yet
>
> you
>
>> seem to delve into very philosophical questions. Are the philosophical
>> discussions applicable to the development of AI (i.e., trying to grasp
>
> all
>
>> aspects of the mind of man if you are trying to develop a true copy),
>
> or are
>
>> they only interesting diversions that pop-up from time to time. My
>
> thanks
>
>> to anyone who wishes to respond.
>>
>> Jeanne Houston
>
>
> My answer is probably too short, but I want to take the risk of being
> misinterpreted in order to be plain:
>
> We can't JUST DO things (like AI). Whenever we DO things, we are
> THINKING ABOUT them. I'd venture to say that HOW WE THINK ABOUT THINGS
> (e.g. philosophy, epistemology, etc.) is even MORE important that DOING
> THINGS (engineering, sales, etc.). That is one way of looking at the
> advantage that we humans have over machines. We have the capability to
> not just do things, but to know why we are doing them. This runs
> counter to the whole PHILOSOPHY (mind you) of modern science, that we
> are simply machines, and that there is no WHY. This modern philosophy,
> if taken to its extreme, is the death of the humanness.
>
> Tom Caylor

I think you've got it the wrong way 'round. The view of modern science is that
we are machines and machines can do philosophy and know they are doing it and
can have reasons why. It is the death of human hubris - which may eventually
succumb to the wounds it has received since Copernicus.

Brent Meeker
Received on Mon Feb 06 2006 - 13:46:07 PST