From: smisch@tiac.not (samson.fischkind)
Date: Mon, 02 Dec 1996 18:40:15 -0400

In article <329DE0E0.585B@ix.netcom.com>, "Phil Roberts, Jr."
 wrote:

[Goedel, Goedel, Goedel...]

> With a little reading between the lines, I believe Lucas can reasonably
> be construed as providing an argument (not a proof) that rationality can
> not be mechanized (or reduced to logic, for that matter) and, conversely,
> that rational creatures are not machines.

What say the cogs, if you substitute "materialized" for "mechanized" in
that sentence? Just build a human zygote from the atom up, put it in an
Acme Instant Incubator and wait. It's not the sort of intelligent
"machine" an AI-er would like to build, but it's artificial and it's
intelligent. QED.

Leave mathematics to mathematicians. This is icky, gooey, stinky biology
we're talking about here.

Excuse the interruption. Carry on...

-- 
smisch@tiac.net