Uh, no. Even hinting that mind = software, brain = hardware (not even sure I agree w that anw) and they get upset.
-
-
This is why I am not 100% interested in convincing people because many people disagree that the brain computes. I believe it computes cos
-
for me that is literally what the definition of computes is.
-
I think disagreement centers around this issue: some people do not agree with me that the brain computes. And I'm OK with that. But to argue
-
that computing and brain-ing (whatever function the brain carries) out are not of the same type, is something I am genuinely not interested
-
in pursuing. I think it's a matter of how one sees the world. One either thinks of computation as something the brain does not they don't.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
then why didn't you like the analogy of a pen on table computing the function "stay here"?...
-
Is it just me that feels this is turning slightly personal?
-
Didn't mean it personally. I felt Searle's pen example is physicalists interpretation of CT-thesis (one I disagree with) which is relevant.
-
I find Searle's arguments, Chinese room, etc generally very shallow and pathetic attempts although often successful at confusing students.
-
[also racist btw]
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
