X-Message-Number: 12953
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 11:10:10 -0500
From: Daniel Crevier <>
Subject: On brains, computers, and parallelism
References: <>

To Thomas Donaldson, who wrote:

> ... Dr Crevier might read up a little on how brains work,
> to verify this point for himself. We aren't just producing an abstract
> machine, we're trying to produce something capable of functioning at 
> the same rate (or faster) than a human brain, and even a small
> acquaintance with how our brain works suggests that any serious 
> version must be a parallel machine.

I wish you wouldn't do that: presuming the other party's ignorance is 
not a friendly way to communicate. For the record, I have read several 
books about the brain, and I am aware that it is a highly parallel sys-
tem. I agree that we'll need a parallel machine to emulate the brain.

I also know a few things about birds, and I still believe that airplanes
can fly without flapping their wings. The whole point of the list of
arguments I submitted is that machines built differently than our brains
can be conscious. This is why the list doesn't say "computers can be
conscious because they can be parallel."

My reason to post the list on Cryonet is not to advocate the 
construction of an "independent machine with its own desires," as you
put it, but to show that, if for some reason we have to come back as 
hardware constructs rather than flesh and blood, we'd still be
ourselves.

Best wishes,
Daniel Crevier

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=12953