Re: "Can a Machine Think?" Judges Needed for Loebner Prize 2005

On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 19:34:47 -0400, HMS Beagle <bgates@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
in comp.ai.philosophy wrote:

>On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 18:54:16 GMT, lesterDELzick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>(Lester Zick) wrote:
>>>Did you know that Sagan was a believer in time travel? It's sad to
>>>say, because I liked the man, but Sagan was a full-blown crackpot in
>>>my book, kind of like a wild-eyed Trekkie. Shame.
>>
>>Well at least you see him for what he was, a pretentious academic who
>>tried to translate geewhiz physics into his own mainstream popularity.
>>
>
>
>
>As a staunch atheist, I must take this oppurtunity to say that I was
>extremely disgusted with the hollywood movie [Contact] starring Jodie
>Foster.

You know, it's curious but Contact was probably the one interesting
thing Sagan ever did because it cast a serious issue, the real failure
of SETI, in very stark relief and that's a subject I have considerable
interest in. I also found Jodie Foster's performance quite credible.

>I have not read the book, but the "moral" of the movie is that
>people's beleif in intelligent life on other planets is as much an
>article of faith as a beleif in the christian God of the old
>testament.

Well I wouldn't take the moral of movies too seriously. Hollywood just
doesn't know how to treat of serious issues, especially intellectual
issues. I remember how much I disliked all the moralizing and
sententious sermonizing in the sequel to Jurassic Park. Then think of
all the wrong turns Hollywood has taken in the treatment of genius.
The only movie close to being interesting on that subject was Good
Will Hunting. At least it came very close to a good treatment.

>The most disgusting part of that movie is the part where one of the
>characters says "98% of people in the world beleive in a God... are
>you saying they are all wrong?"
>
>This number (im not sure if its 98% or not, it was somethign like
>that) is patently and utterly false. The ancient and classical and
>MODERN chinese civilization never had a god in their religion. EVER.
>In fact, today in china they are officially atheist. This idea that
>all people are christians deep down and recognize ONE SINGLE god is
>patently false. Both Japanese Hinto and classical Greek
>civilizations had multiple gods in their religions. Taoism was not
>even about a god at all, and it was the main religion in all of
>Southeast asia. (ancient chinese religion did have both souls and
>Heaven... but there was no "god" in the heaven overlooking everything)
>
>This is not the first time a completely utterly false fact has been
>spewed in a Hollywood movie. The other one was in that cockroach
>science fiction movie. "It only took 3 millions years for monkeys to
>turn into humans" is the exact dialogue. That sentence is so wrong
>on so many levels, I'm not even going to expand on it any further.
>
>If Carl Sagan's book contained this conversation, he is even more
>dissappointing to me than he was before. But I dont really know
>because I havent read it.

I've read the book but don't remember the conversation one way or the
other. Certainly it sounds like Sagan. Just remember he undoubtedly
would have said whatever he thought popular audiences wanted to hear
with a scientific veneer.

~v~~

.