HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: christo@psych.toronto.edu (Christopher Green)
Subject: Re: John Searle
Organization: Department of Psychology, University of Toronto
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 17:15:20 GMT

In article <1992Dec21.003346.11084@cs.su.oz.au> danny@cs.su.oz.au (Danny) writes:
>In article <1992Dec18.000631.26201@psych.toronto.edu> christo@psych.toronto.edu (Christopher Green) writes:
>>In article <1992Dec17.015705.630@cs.su.oz.au> danny@cs.su.oz.au (Danny) writes:
>>>
>>>OK.  If there are no differing causal consequences at all between your 
>>>sensation of colour and mine then I would argue that your sensation of 
>>>colour is the same as mine.  
>>
>>And what, pray tell, would be your warrant for that conclusion.
>>Assuming you're limiting "causal consequences" to behavioral ones,
>>you've only looked a half the story. If you don't, on the other hand,
>>limit to behavioral consequences, then I'll claim (from personal
>>experience) that you're just wrong.
>
>I am not limiting "causal consequences".  You can claim that I'm wrong,
>but since from your own position there's no way of telling who's right,
>and since your position require extra properties, I win by application
>of Occam's razor...

No way of telling who's right? You've lost me. But even if there were no
such way, that would hardly warrant you abolishing the topic. Maybe
there are things we can't know (though I certainly wouldn't claim this
for qualia. I'm perfectly satisfied they exist.)
-cdg-
-- 
Christopher D. Green                christo@psych.toronto.edu
Psychology Department               cgreen@lake.scar.utoronto.ca
University of Toronto
Toronto, Ontario M5S 1A1
Newsgroups: sci.cognitive
From: neilb@physics.su.OZ.AU (RiemannZeta(s))
Subject: Re: John Searle
Organization: School of Physics, University of Sydney, Australia
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 01:08:40 GMT

In article <1992Dec21.171807.2296@psych.toronto.edu> christo@psych.toronto.edu (Christopher Green) writes:
>You've messed up the attributions here. It's Antoni who's expressed what
>I called "crude pragmatism", and if you agree with it, then I suggest you
>read up on the fall of pragmatic theories of truth. The _Encyclopedia of
>Philosophy_ would probably be a reasonable place to begin, though it's a
>bit dated (1967).

Ooops!  Sorry about the attribution.  I have't read the Encyclopaedia of
Philosophy, but I have read a reasonable amount of epistemology.  
I wouldn't really describe myself as a "naive" pragmatist (nor would
Antoni I suspect), but one conclusion I did come to is that the theories
of truth that don't contain at least some concessions to the pragmatist 
view are pretty silly.

Danny.
--
*************************************************
I ache for the touch of your lips, Dear,
But much more for the touch of your whips, Dear.
You can raise welts
Like nobody else,
As we dance to the Masochism Tango.
*************************************************
From: pxf@cs.bham.ac.uk (Pranath Fernando)
Newsgroups: sci.cognitive
Subject: Re: List of Cog Sci Schools needed
Date: 23 Dec 92 13:58:05 GMT
Organization: University of Birmingham

There are two Masters Cognitive Science Degrees (At least) in England.

One is at Manchester University, the other is at Birmingham University (the one
I'm on !).

Well, speaking for the Birmingham course - it's very good, sufficiently broad,
relevant, and in touch with the most recent work.

Our admissions Tutor's address is :

dmp@@cs.bham.ac.uk

(Donald Peterson).

If your more philosophically inclined, thers's an MA course in the Philosophy of
Cognitive Science, at Sussex University. From what I hear its a good course too,
and I believe it's still being run by Andy Clark (of 'Microcognition' fame).

Hope this helps,

Pranath
From: neilb@physics.su.OZ.AU (RiemannZeta(s))
Subject: Re: John Searle
Organization: School of Physics, University of Sydney, Australia
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 01:15:58 GMT

In article <1992Dec22.172901.27737@psych.toronto.edu> michael@psych.toronto.edu (Michael Gemar) writes:
>In article <1992Dec21.002907.10911@cs.su.oz.au> danny@cs.su.oz.au (Danny) writes:
>>Well if it has no causal consequences why on earth would we want to believe
>>there is such a thing?
>>
>
>Well, *I* feel pain, see colours, hear sounds, etc.  I guess you're simply
>anesthetized...

But I have no problems with pain or hearing - pain certainly has causal 
consequences!  What I WOULD object to is a theory that postulated an
emotion called (say) "grindesse", which had no causal consequences at all -
ie there was by its nature no way of telling whether anyone was
experiencing it or not (it didn't affect their behaviour or speech in
any way).

This is the kind of status which Christopher is arguing that Searle wants 
to attribute to consciousness.

Danny.
--
*********************************
words, words, words, words,
I have no words
To describe the vanity of life,
The insane inanity of life,
I have no words but ha!
*********************************
Newsgroups: sci.cognitive
From: christo@psych.toronto.edu (Christopher Green)
Subject: Re: John Searle
Organization: Department of Psychology, University of Toronto
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 22:19:09 GMT

In article <1992Dec30.010055.28422@ucc.su.OZ.AU> neilb@physics.su.OZ.AU (RiemannZeta(s)) writes:
>In article <1992Dec21.171520.2152@psych.toronto.edu> christo@psych.toronto.edu (Christopher Green) writes:
>>No way of telling who's right? You've lost me. But even if there were no
>>such way, that would hardly warrant you abolishing the topic. Maybe
>>there are things we can't know (though I certainly wouldn't claim this
>>for qualia. I'm perfectly satisfied they exist.)
>
>We are basically arguing about different theories of truth.  You are using
>a correspondence theory and I am using a coherence theory...  So you are
>perfectly happy with things that are intrinsically unknowable, while I'm
>not.  

Even coherence theories have to account for reference (something they
notoriously have trouble with) or they're not semantic theories at all.

>At any rate, if Searle is seriously arguing that consciousness
>exists but is unknowable then that DOES warrant stopping work on his theory, 
>since if it true then there's no point trying to study consciousness at all,
>and if it's not then we shouldn't be using it!
>
Perhaps, but of course he's not arguing anything of the kind. It is only
knowlable subjectively. That doesn't make it *ontologically* subjective.
It's as much a fact of the world as a rock. It's just not shareable.
If you have no subjective experience of consciousness, I guess you're
just out of luck. Better go into another science.

-- 
Christopher D. Green                christo@psych.toronto.edu
Psychology Department               cgreen@lake.scar.utoronto.ca
University of Toronto
Toronto, Ontario M5S 1A1
Newsgroups: sci.cognitive
From: przemek@tokamak.viewlogic.com (Przemek Skoskiewicz)
Subject: Philosophy Departments in New England...
Originator: przemek@tokamak
Organization: Viewlogic Systems, Inc.
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 16:17:00 GMT


I'm seriously considering graduate study in philosophy, specifically cognitive
philosophy.  What are the recommended schools that I should check out?  Since I
live near Boston, that area interests me the most.  Any recommendations?

I know that I have to do plenty of research into this myself--I'm looking for
places to start.  Much obliged.

-- 
Viewlogic Systems, Inc.                         Przemek Skoskiewicz
293 Boston Post Road West
Marlborough, MA 01752-4615, USA
email: przemek@viewlogic.com
Newsgroups: sci.cognitive
From: neilb@physics.su.OZ.AU (RiemannZeta(s))
Subject: Re: John Searle
Organization: School of Physics, University of Sydney, Australia
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 01:00:55 GMT

In article <1992Dec21.171520.2152@psych.toronto.edu> christo@psych.toronto.edu (Christopher Green) writes:
>No way of telling who's right? You've lost me. But even if there were no
>such way, that would hardly warrant you abolishing the topic. Maybe
>there are things we can't know (though I certainly wouldn't claim this
>for qualia. I'm perfectly satisfied they exist.)

We are basically arguing about different theories of truth.  You are using
a correspondence theory and I am using a coherence theory...  So you are
perfectly happy with things that are intrinsically unknowable, while I'm
not.  At any rate, if Searle is seriously arguing that consciousness
exists but is unknowable then that DOES warrant stopping work on his theory, 
since if it true then there's no point trying to study consciousness at all,
and if it's not then we shouldn't be using it!

Danny.

P.S. I am posting from a friend's account.
--
*************************************************
I ache for the touch of your lips, Dear,
But much more for the touch of your whips, Dear.
You can raise welts
Like nobody else,
As we dance to the Masochism Tango.
*************************************************
Newsgroups: sci.cognitive
From: michael@psych.toronto.edu (Michael Gemar)
Subject: Re: John Searle
Organization: Department of Psychology, University of Toronto
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 17:29:01 GMT

In article <1992Dec21.002907.10911@cs.su.oz.au> danny@cs.su.oz.au (Danny) writes:
>In article <1992Dec18.003427.2149@psych.toronto.edu> michael@psych.toronto.edu (Michael Gemar) writes:
>>*No* popular account of consciousness (assuming dualism isn't popular)
>>gives a causal role to it.  Functionalism certainly doesn't - there is
>>no reason to ascribe "consciousness" to certain functional arrangements
>>except for sake of discursive simplicity (i.e., "intentional stance").
>>*Nobody* who's a materialist has a clue how consciousness could have
>>causal efficacy.  (This may be all the worse for materialism, but
>>that's another story...)
>
>Well if it has no causal consequences why on earth would we want to believe
>there is such a thing?
>

Well, *I* feel pain, see colours, hear sounds, etc.  I guess you're simply
anesthetized...

- michael


Newsgroups: sci.cognitive
From: christo@psych.toronto.edu (Christopher Green)
Subject: Re: John Searle
Organization: Department of Psychology, University of Toronto
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 17:18:07 GMT

In article <1992Dec21.003650.11227@cs.su.oz.au> danny@cs.su.oz.au (Danny) writes:
>In article <1992Dec18.000838.26936@psych.toronto.edu> christo@psych.toronto.edu (Christopher Green) writes:
>>In article <BzEvzJ.1s1@cs.bham.ac.uk> ard@cs.bham.ac.uk (Antoni Diller) writes:
>>>In article <1992Dec15.173641.17791@psych.toronto.edu> michael@psych.toronto.edu (Michael Gemar) writes:
>>>So long as we can successfully communicate, then it doesn't matter
>>>if your experience of the sky is similar to mine.  
>>
>>It matters to anyone who doesn't adopt the rather crude pragmatism that
>>you have just endorsed. Some of us are interested in truth, not just
>>whether or not something "works"
>
>This entire discussion should be moved to sci.epistemology :)
>I'm curious just what kind of theory of truth you have...  I think
>my position is probably pretty close to what you call Michael's 
>"crude pragmatism", I've never been able to find a coherent alternative.
>
You've messed up the attributions here. It's Antoni who's expressed what
I called "crude pragmatism", and if you agree with it, then I suggest you
read up on the fall of pragmatic theories of truth. The _Encyclopedia of
Philosophy_ would probably be a reasonable place to begin, though it's a
bit dated (1967).

-- 
Christopher D. Green                christo@psych.toronto.edu
Psychology Department               cgreen@lake.scar.utoronto.ca
University of Toronto
Toronto, Ontario M5S 1A1
Newsgroups: sci.cognitive
From: frank@s7.msi.umn.edu (Loren Frank)
Subject: Re: qualia
Organization: University of Minnesota
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 18:34:49 GMT

>>Even apart from the typo, this is just silly.  Presumably we're all
>>functionalists about car engines (to be a car engine is to be something
>>that plays the appropriate sort of causal role in a car), but you can
>>find out an awful lot about engines by looking under the hood.
>>
>It may, but it needn't, is the point. I may have overstated the case,
>but I was trying to distinguish type-identity theory from the
>token-identity theory for someone who apparently hadn't heard the
>news.

>-- 
>Christopher D. Green                christo@psych.toronto.edu
>Psychology Department               cgreen@lake.scar.utoronto.ca
>University of Toronto
>Toronto, Ontario M5S 1A1

This is off on a slight tangent, but isn't it true that you find out a lot
about a car engine by looking under the hood only if you have some idea of
what the silly thing (the engine) is supposed to do in the first place. I would
imagine that if one presented a car at an art show to a group of people who
had never seen a car nor anything similar, a good hard look on their part 
would produce substantially different perceptions than would arise with 
someone who owned a car.
	It seems to me that filtering out the data from the noise requires that
one know what to look for and have a number of presuppositions about what is 
going to turn up. In the case of the brian / mind question, if we are looking
at neural activation vectors to determine the mental state of an individual,
we are going to have to know what sort of phenomena to pay attention to,  look 
for, as otherwise we will be be faced with ten or perhaps a hundred billion 
bits of information at any given time, most of which probably have little or 
nothing to do with whatever it is we are interested in. As such, to study a 
a pattern of activation, we have to start with some sort of physical or 
behavioral evidense and then study the neural correlates of those pattens.
	Upon a quick rereading, I realize that this is more of a tangent than
I had originally intended. Ah well. A quick swipe at eliminative materialism
can be a good thing too....


Loren Frank
frankl@carleton.edu
From: pt@curie.lif.icnet.uk (Paul Taylor <pt@acl.icnet.uk>)
Newsgroups: sci.cognitive
Subject: Re: qualia
Date: 23 Dec 1992 15:06:30 -0000
Organization: Imperial Cancer Research Fund
NNTP-Posting-Host: curie.lif.icnet.uk

In article <frank.725049289@msi.umn.edu> frank@s7.msi.umn.edu (Loren Frank) writes:

>	... In the case of the brian / mind question ...

Oh God
Newsgroups: sci.cognitive
Subject: word frequency norms and more
From: aminoff@isr.harvard.edu (Alexander G. Aminoff)
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 92 19:15:13 GMT
Followup-To: sci.cognitive
Organization: Harvard University, Cambridge, MA
Keywords: word, frequency, Francis, Kucera
Summary: need on-line word frequency database

I am looking for a database of word frequency norms in electronic format.
If such a database contained phonetic spellings of the words as well
that would be even better. It would also be nice if these word
frequency counts were collected more recently than Francis & Kucera,
1967.

Please respond by email to me; If I receive sufficient replies
to warrant it I will post a summary.


	Alexander Aminoff		Harvard University
	Research Assistant		Department of Psychology
	aminoff@isr.harvard.edu		33 Kirkland st. room 855
	W: (617) 495-3856		Cambridge, MA 02138


-- 

	Alexander Aminoff		Harvard University
	Research Assistant		Department of Psychology
	aminoff@isr.harvard.edu		33 Kirkland st. room 855
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: dennisn@ecs.comm.mot.com (Dennis Newkirk)
Subject: Re: Shuttle thermal tiles
Organization: Motorola
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 13:20:21 GMT

In article <BzHEJ7.8t6@zoo.toronto.edu> henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes:
>Anybody know if anything's been released on Buran's tile technology?
>Allegedly the Buran tiles are not as long-lasting, but they're tougher.

Russian articles have said the tiles were designed to last at least
10 missions. Buran has about 38000 tiles, and 4 were lost during its mission.
A critical article claimed that thousands were damaged during Buran
launch preparations and over 10,000 had to be rebonded also. Tile weight
was 9000 kg. for Buran in 1988, and there are claims that new orbiters would
use more advanced and lighter TPS material.

Dennis Newkirk (dennisn@ecs.comm.mot.com)
Motorola, Land Mobile Products Sector
Schaumburg, IL
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: Nick_Janow@mindlink.bc.ca (Nick Janow)
Subject: Re: Aluminum as Rocket Fuel?
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 20:35:31 GMT

0004244402@mcimail.com (Karl Dishaw) writes:

> How's liquid Al going to work in the combustion chamber?
>
> --forming fine droplets will require a new injector plate--how did that
> work for the Li-F rocket Bruce mentioned?  What kind of surface tension
> does LAl have?  How small would we have to get the droplets to be?

Depending on the reaction chamber and throat material and conditions, it
might be possible to use ultrasonics to break the aluminum into fine
droplets.

Hmmm, I vaguely that there are ways to make ultrasonic "whistles".  I don't
know if this could be applied to the injection system, but if it could, it
would at least not require an electrical power source.  It does sound complex
though; hopefully existing injection technology will produce droplets of
sufficiently small size.

I wonder if acoustical energy can somehow be used to protect the surfaces
from accumulation of aluminum oxide?

--

Nick_Janow@mindlink.bc.ca
From: lord@tradent.wimsey.bc.ca (Jason Cooper)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: *** BUSSARD RAMSCOOP ***
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 92 08:03:23 PST
Organization: TradeNET International Trade Corp.

This is just a quick repeat of a message I sent earlier this week.  Can 
anybody in this group help me with the physics aspects of the Bussard 
ramscoop?  For those who don't know, the ramscoop collects charged H 
(charged by it) from the interstellar material with a huge magnetic field 
(moving, at reasonably high velocities, that is), thus deflecting that 
hydrogen into the engine itself, where it is fused for thrust.  I'm 
seeking assistance with the fusing itself.  Can anybody here explain to 
me (in reasonably plain language, I'm in Grade 11 (though I _can_ 
understand most grade 12 concepts, or perhaps better (try me))) what the 
fusion reaction produced in the sun requires (IE do I just need to 
pressure up a bunch of plain old Hydrogen?) and what the _exact_ 
reactions are that occur resulting in how much energy (MeV please) 
produced?  Anybody know much about the Bussard ramscoop here and just 
feel like helping me?  Oh yeah, I should mention that this is for a 
science fair project, which is why I am looking for detailed descriptions 
of reactions, etc, as, firstly, I need to explain this to a judge, and 
secondly, I need to know all I can.  Thank you for your time.

                                                Jason Cooper

[mail replies please]
From: jeppe@clinet.fi (Joachim Paganus)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Orbital elements of junk in space wanted
Date: 3 Jan 1993 05:43:18 +0200
Organization: Clinet, Espoo, Finland.
NNTP-Posting-Host: clinet.fi

I'm looking for a '2-line orbital elements list' of junk, i.e. deceased
satellites, rocket-bodies and other debris that is still in orbit.
I have one very old list, but where could I get a list that is up to
date? (I don't know from where I got the list I have)

-- 
Joachim Paganus
jeppe@niisk.pp.fi
jeppe@clinet.fi
From: nsmca@acad3.alaska.edu
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: russian solar sail?+
Date: 2 Jan 93 02:12:36 GMT
Article-I.D.: acad3.1993Jan1.181236.1
Organization: University of Alaska Fairbanks

In article <ida.725390192@atomic>, ida@atomic (David Goldschmidt) writes:
> I saw something a few months ago about a Russian plan to test a small solar
> sail from the Mir space station on Dec 10. of this year.  I haven't heard
> anything about it since - does anybody know if it happened?
> 
> You can email me at dsp@ccr-p.ida.org, or post to the net.
> 
> Thanks in advance,
> 		   Dave Patterson, guest on this account.

New one on me, but I have heard of the supposed race to the moon with solar 
sails, to celebrate the 500 anniversary of Columbus, not sure if it 
actually came about.. Maybe the olymbics will have a solar sale race or 
some other organization will have a solar sail race.. 

==
==
Michael Adams alias Ghost Wheel/Morgoth NSMCA@acad3.alaska.edu
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth)
Subject: Re: DC vs Shuttle capabilities
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 09:18:28 GMT


Sorry I'm posting this again, but I missed the answers to these questions
the last couple of times I posted them.  Like I said, my site for some
reason junks messages in some groups after only a couple of days or so.

(And yet talk.bizarre can exceed 450+ new messages with nothing lost :-) Go
 figure!)

 Anyway,

 I had b  Could it carry sufficient fuel for a lunar landing plus return
 and landing on Earth?   I know one problem might be the placement of an
 airlock for surface EVA's and perhaps the strength of the landing gear on
 rough surfaces. e living area or just the cockput?).  I'm assuming that
 the crew seats would be configured vertically to minimiaze G-force effects
 on the crew during launch.  Is this correct.


 Pardon my lack on knowledge on this topic, and I apologize again for
 the repeated posting, but if my site would allow for a user not logging
 on all the time I wouldn't have missed the answers the first time! :-)


 Simon
From: roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov (John Roberts)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: GEO satellites as electrical vehicles
Date: 28 Dec 92 13:14:18 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.Bzz0tA.66.1
Distribution: sci
Organization: National Institute of Standards and Technology formerly National Bureau of Standards
X-Added: Forwarded by Space Digest
Original-Sender: isu@VACATION.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU


-From: Bruce_Dunn@mindlink.bc.ca (Bruce Dunn)
-Subject: GEO satellites as electrical vehicles
-Date: 28 Dec 92 01:10:31 GMT
-Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada

-        An interesting idea.  Modern comsats have several kilowatts of power,
-enough to run an ion or arcjet engine.  An electric engine running off a few
-kilowatts has a mass of only a few kg, so could easily be carried on the
-vehicle.  
-...
-A major problem would probably be radiation damage due to having to spend
-some months in the Van Allen belts as the satellite spirals down to LEO.

Question: what is the radiation profile of the Van Allen belts? This is
of interest because GEO is in the outer portions of the outer belt.
In particular, what is the ratio between the peak radiation level in
the belts and the level at GEO?

John Roberts
roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov
From: ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: SSTO vs. 2 Stage
Date: 29 Dec 92 19:46:24 GMT
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In <18892@mindlink.bc.ca> Bruce_Dunn@mindlink.bc.ca (Bruce Dunn) writes:

>        We have been launching staged rockets for nearly half a century.  I
>think the problems of staging, if not trivial, are solvable.  Certainly,
>historical evidence indicates that staging is less of a technical challenge
>than SSTO operation.

Bingo!

Okay, now we've gotten to the crux of the problem.

You simply do not understand the difference between a converted
artillery rocket, which we have been launching for nearly half
a century, and a single-stage-to-orbit *spaceship*.

Saying that launch vehicles should be multistaged like ICBMs
makes as much sense as saying that airplanes should be shaped 
like cannonballs.