[Humanist] 23.530 AI and other kinds of intelligence
Humanist Discussion Group
willard.mccarty at mccarty.org.uk
Sat Jan 2 08:42:40 CET 2010
Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 23, No. 530.
Centre for Computing in the Humanities, King's College London
Submit to: humanist at lists.digitalhumanities.org
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2009 08:03:14 -0800 (PST)
From: Laval Hunsucker <amoinsde at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [Humanist] 23.528 AI and other kinds of intelligence
OK, very quickly.
I've got little ( presumably less than you, anyway )
problem with chisels or hammers ; but more with
ideas ( forecasts ) like : ". . . to be no more con-
scious of the computer than we are of the pencil or
the telephone". ( When are we ever gonna get
*there* ? ; he was speaking twenty-five years ago,
and it's not just a usability thing either. ) Also a
problem with the suggestion that such is "the aim
of their [ the experts' ] enterprise" ; *do they* look
at it that way ? Oh well, he *was* ( only ) a profes-
sor of English and university president :-).
I also wonder how many good theoretical physicists
( for example ) would not claim that much -- even
all ? -- of what Chace attributes to art in the passage
"Art is nothing if not . . .. Thus art’s pleasure.", in the
second paragraph of your quoted excerpt, applies,
as well, to their own fields.
> Exactly what is being denied or dismissed?
The notion that most any of us could develop a
reasonably good grasp of how a pencil *really*
works, should we be inclined actually to inquire
into the matter ? ;-)
Happy Sylvester, Silvester, New Year or whatever,
to all list-followers -- however they may ( or may
not ) celebrate it.
- Laval Hunsucker
--- On Thu, 12/31/09, Humanist Discussion Group <willard.mccarty at mccarty.org.uk> wrote:
From: Humanist Discussion Group <willard.mccarty at mccarty.org.uk>
More information about the Humanist