[quoting Deijmann, 26 May 99] My point is a very sensitive one. To understand my point we have to go all the way down to the bone of it. The only thing stored on computers is magnetic metal parts.
And what is stored in human brains? Some kind of electro-chemical trace. This does not differ in principle from magnetic tape.
You are right again that I ATTEMPT to transmit the meaning. I have no guarantee whatsoever that I will succeed. Nevertheless it is your interpretation, starting from the contrasting dots on your screen up to understanding the content and agreeing (or not) with it and perhaps even become excited about it.
Computers can do that too. Meaning is fundamentally reference. Words are either pointers or error-correcting code. Computers can handle both of these tasks. You have not demonstrated that we are different from machines, in principle.
Yes that's right but only until the eyes of a human meets the content, thinks about it, enlivens it with his feelings of amazement, irritation, excitement, than personalizes it and transforms the idea's into ideals that he wants to realize and acts on it. No computer or software will ever be able to replace that process.
Why not? Let us say I replace one neuron in my brain with a circuit that emulates the neuron. This is possible you must agree.
Now I replace every other neuron in my brain with circuits that emulate each of them. (This is not possible now for various technical reasons, not to mention ethical ones.) Would not that emulated brain be functionally identical to my brain in every way?
No serious person believes there is something "mysterious" about yeast that cannot be explained in bio-chemical terms. Yeast DNA and human DNA are not so different. We can be explained too. (But not quite yet.)