[extropy-chat] Role of Observer is not Relevant
stathisp at gmail.com
Thu Apr 5 04:54:10 UTC 2007
On 4/5/07, Jef Allbright <jef at jefallbright.net> wrote:
On 4/4/07, Stathis Papaioannou <stathisp at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I think I've strayed a bit from my original purpose, which was to try to
> > persuade you that thought experiments in which extremely improbable
> > happen by chance should not be summarily dismissed as irrelevant.
> Isn't this assertion the very antithesis of rationality?!
> With full regard to remaining open to surprising new observations, but
> little regard for assigning "relevance" without justification.
I was referring to certain philosophical arguments, such as John Searle's
Chinese room, which is wrong for philosophical reasons, not becauseof the
undoubted practical difficulties it would pose. Engineering and philosophy
are not the same discipline.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the extropy-chat