(5 of 8)
How many consciousness theorists can dance on the head of a pin? The truth is, a mechanical system that is complex enough (living or not) may mimic consciousness without actually being conscious. Your entire article might have been the result of such mimicry, as might this letter. Ultimately there is no way to distinguish real from false except via personal experience. I know I'm conscious, but I can't really speak for the rest of you. Peering into the brain is as futile as peering into a TV set to explain the mimicry of a sunset on the screen. ROY BUTTERFIELD Keighley, England Via E-mail
I believe machines will someday soon be able to think like humans. And when computers lie and kill, they will also be acting like humans. HARRY LAUDIE Pierrefonds, Quebec Via E-mail
Your article is an example of scientists' realizing that there seems to be another dimension to our existence, yet at the same time denying that there can be one. True science examines all the evidence and weighs it impartially. But it seems that evidence is more often weighed out in light of belief of the scientists working on it. It would be good to see scientists more open to the possibility of a power behind our world: God. MARIANNE STAMM Westlock, Alberta
Chess master Garry Kasparov's report on his match with the computer Deep Blue was enchanting. It was a look inside a computer's brain by someone who knows how to do surgery on a person's thinking process. In order to think, computers will need emotion; they will need to feel pain. Thinking is imagination; it is discipline, kindness and love. It is also greed and hatred. Thinking is human. It is logical and illogical at the same time. Thinking is individual. Computers can be made to achieve a goal, but that goal needs to be created by man. Can a computer be an individual? Can a computer be human? I would not have thought that humans had lost to a machine even if Kasparov had been defeated by Deep Blue. But his victory is comforting. AJAY GOYAL Moscow
It amazes me that people would compare human thought to a pure number-crunching operation. Playing chess is number crunching; thinking is an entirely different game. Let me humbly offer a unique test for determining whether a computer can think. I call it the Dylan test. Build two artificial-intelligence machines exactly alike and load them with exactly the same software. Then put some Bob Dylan music for them to listen to. When one machine hates it and the other loves it, you have some real thinking going on. DELIO DESTRO Sao Paulo, Brazil Via E-mail
I.R.A. CAMPAIGN