Ben, I have heard the argument for point 2 before, in the book by Pinker, "How the Mind Works". It is the inverse-optics problem: physics can predict what image will be formed on the retina from material arrangements, but if we want to go backwards and find the arrangements from the retinal image, we do not have enough data at all. Pinker concludes that we do it using cognitive bias.
--Abram On Sun, Oct 5, 2008 at 7:28 PM, Ben Goertzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Abram, > > thx for restating his argument > >> >> >> Your argument appears to assume computationalism. Here is a numbered >> restatement: >> >> 1. We have a visual experience of the world. >> 2. Science says that the information from the retina is insufficient >> to compute one. > > I do not understand his argument for point 2 > >> >> 3. Therefore, we must get more information. >> 4. The only possible sources are material and spatial. >> 5. Material is already known to be insufficient, therefore we must >> also get spatial info. > > ben > > ________________________________ > agi | Archives | Modify Your Subscription ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=114414975-3c8e69 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
