It seems a little like an argument where the two sides are squaring off with different terminological bases.
For me, "intentional" is an emergent concept. Something has intention if modeling something as having a mind with intentions gives a better model than modeling without. Most complex animals are better modeled that way. Simpler animals (eg ants) can often be modelled as mindless automata, and so could be described as intentionless. Of course there will be no obvious line of demarcation. One can model a thermostat as having a mind - its just that its not that good a model. So this means I more or less agree with you. However, the other camp are probably interested in the mind in the "what is it like to be" sense. Just because we model a creature as having a mind, doesn't mean there is anything it is like to be that creature. It need not be conscious. It definitely need not be self-aware (which is a more objectively measureable property). I argue that it is necessary to be self-aware to be conscious, but this email is too short to repeat the argument here. It is in my upcoming book "Theory of Nothing" though, if I've whetted anyone's appetite. Cheers On Sun, Jun 25, 2006 at 09:20:04PM -0400, Nicholas Thompson wrote: > For those rare few of you that are INTENSELY interested by the recent > discussion on self consciousness, here is a paper on the subject which > asserts that every organism must have a point of view. > > http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/id14.html > > If anybody survives this one, there is a later one that establishes that such > a point of view must include itself as a part. > > Nothing if not Escherian. (Escherian Coli, some would say.) > > Nick > > > Nicholas Thompson > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson > ============================================================ > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org -- *PS: A number of people ask me about the attachment to my email, which is of type "application/pgp-signature". Don't worry, it is not a virus. It is an electronic signature, that may be used to verify this email came from me if you have PGP or GPG installed. Otherwise, you may safely ignore this attachment. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- A/Prof Russell Standish Phone 8308 3119 (mobile) Mathematics 0425 253119 (") UNSW SYDNEY 2052 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Australia http://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks International prefix +612, Interstate prefix 02 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
