What is Human?

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by David Floyd
So, by extension, we can simply kill babies and infants if they become bothersome, sorta like we can put down dogs, right?

You think that isn't done in parts of the world and wasn't done throughout history? Ever hear of exposure? But our society finds such things deplorable and has outlawed such behavior.

[St Leo]

We shouldn't be putting down dogs.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by St Leo
We shouldn't be putting down dogs.

An even better answer.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Comrade Tassadar

Because I'm posting here.

Why? Is it possible that your ramblings could be mimiced by a suitably complex machine (in the case of non-CPA members it's a simple unsexy machine running Windows)?

If it is possible, what evidence do I have one way or the other?

[GePap]

Originally posted by Agathon


Why? Is it possible that your ramblings could be mimiced by a suitably complex machine (in the case of non-CPA members it's a simple unsexy machine running Windows)?

If it is possible, what evidence do I have one way or the other?

Nah, smiley usesage is far too complex to model accrately, and some things said are so dumb not even a computer rogram would do so, like empty posts

[Agathon]

Originally posted by GePap

Nah, smiley usesage is far too complex to model accrately, and some things said are so dumb not even a computer rogram would do so, like empty posts

That's unlikely, not impossible.

Anyway, look at how all the horndogs swarmed to the pretty girl's picture thread.

Predictable schmictable.

[GePap]

A few of the posts by theselves are unlikely, not impossible, but take the whole opus (if we dare call it that) of most posters, and given the state of computer tech, it becomes impossible to assume they are computers.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by GePap
A few of the posts by theselves are unlikely, not impossible, but take the whole opus (if we dare call it that) of most posters, and given the state of computer tech, it becomes impossible to assume they are computers.

I don't see how. Unlikely, yes, impossible, no.

****! Ate post!!!!

But who says it's our computer tech?

Anyway, consciousness need not figure in the explanation, which is the real point.

[Nubclear]

Originally posted by Agathon


Why? Is it possible that your ramblings could be mimiced by a suitably complex machine

No. Thanks for asking

[GePap]

It is not impossible that a 50 mile asteroid will land on your head right.NOW!.....waits for the boom to hit NYC........
la, la , lalalala, lalala, lala....

Nope, didn't happen. If you want to be technical, the probability approches 0, and get very, very, very close. Is it technically utterly impossible (is probability surely a 0?)? no, but close enough man, close enough.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Comrade Tassadar


No. Thanks for asking

That sounds like a machine talking to me.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by GePap
It is not impossible that a 50 mile asteroid will land on your head right.NOW!.....waits for the boom to hit NYC........
la, la , lalalala, lalala, lala....

Nope, didn't happen. If you want to be technical, the probability approches 0, and get very, very, very close. Is it technically utterly impossible (is probability surely a 0?)? no, but close enough man, close enough.

Being able to determine that another being is conscious based on probabilities is hopeless. This is because we only have one case - our own - and that's it.

[GePap]

Well, not really, unless you discount the ability to define any other adult person you have met and interacted with as being sentient becuase you lack some telepathic link.
ihave been with enough people (including not the most stable people) to trust that Tassadar is a human being, and you as well.

[SKILORD]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


You think that isn't done in parts of the world and wasn't done throughout history? Ever hear of exposure? But our society finds such things deplorable and has outlawed such behavior.

Rather we have not, but simply shortened the deadline Historical prejudice against the young is a travesty and a blight on our history. Sure, Adolf Hitler killed a few hundred thousand (million) jews because he felt them inferior. But how does that stand next to the massive amount of infants which have been killed throughout history because they were 'inferior' or 'unwanted'.

To make my point work though, I have to define human as a being with the potential for free thought and the ability to express that thought, posessing free will. This makes Infants just as much human as the average person on the street. It also manages to disclude beasts, who operate primarily upon instinct.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Agathon
Define "sentient".

"Deep-seated hatred for philosophy majors."