X-Message-Number: 11518 From: Thomas Donaldson <> Subject: reply to Ettinger, on symbols and thoughts Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1999 23:26:05 +1000 (EST) Comments to Bob re symbol processing, etc: I agree that it would be possible to make a machine which actually thought and had actual feelings (though just how to design the feeling part is not clear --- if you want the feelings to match those of a human being). And that machine would have to be closer to a thermostat than to a computer: it would engage in real reactions to real events. We ourselves are closer to thermostats than computers --- we just have far more elaborate reactions than any thermostat. The issue is that of the relation of symbols to the world. When human beings think, they may use symbols (as when you plan out what you might say to someone), but behind those symbols is their connection, implicit or not, to lower level brain events which are not symbolic. When I see something with my eyes, a great deal of processing goes on before I even become conscious of it. I may assign names to the final results, but that prior processing is what gives meaning to those names. Computers basically manipulate symbols according to rules programmed into them. It's easy to see how our thoughts are grounded on nonsymbolic events. All you have to do is to try to define your words with other words, WITHOUT being circular. And in the end, you may be reduced to pointing and gurgling. But that is the point of what I'm saying: even when we are at our most abstract, we are ultimately dealing with nonsymbolic events. Best and long long life, Thomas Donaldson Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=11518