[lbo-talk] re: AI

Eubulides paraconsistent at comcast.net
Wed Nov 19 15:48:14 PST 2003


----- Original Message ----- From: "Curtiss Leung" <curtiss_leung at ibi.com>


> *sigh*
>
> OK, I'll turn this around: suppose it's shown that human beings
> and only human beings can think and have emotions. Exactly why
> does that make us any less objects? And why should it be a bad
> thing to be an object? And why should it be a good thing, let
> alone the best thing, if we are the only type of objects that
> think and feel?
>
> Curtiss, over quota and laying off for the day.

==================

Why do we even need an object ontology? How about a neo-Heraclitean event-relationality ontology?

Panta Rhea, paraconsistently!

Ian



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list