Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 14, No. 443.
Centre for Computing in the Humanities, King's College London
<http://www.princeton.edu/~mccarty/humanist/>
<http://www.kcl.ac.uk/humanities/cch/humanist/>
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 06:38:36 +0100
From: Randall Pierce <rpierce@jsucc.jsu.edu>
Subject: terminology
The terms "fantasy" and "science fiction" have been used in connection
with the "Robot's Creed". I have mentioned that getting a robot to
interrelate to a human involves certain risks. And asked if we should
consider safeguards. Nanotechnology makes it theoretically possible to
so chart the neural systems of the human brain that an electronic analog
could be constructed. Is this fantasy or science fiction? Or is it a
logical extrapolation of current developments? There is a saying in
History of Science: "When it is time to railroad, you railroad." In
other words, when technological development in a field reaches a certain
point which makes it possible to advance the scope of that field, it is
done. Hypertext technology was in its infancy not many years ago. Before
that it was a concept to be studied. At one time it was probably
considered "fantasy" and science-fiction". As we develop new information
technologies, what will be the implications? A self-programming text
analyzer with the ability to make what I call "cognitive connections" is
one description of an information scientist. Or it could be used to
describe some future neural analog device?. How much information can
human scientists creatively use before they need the assistance of
constructs specifically designed to analyze information. Cutting-edge
computers would be too slow and require too much direction. A real
"thinking machine" may be needed. And if it interreacts with scientists,
in what manner? Randall?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 10/29/00 EST