Quote:
Originally Posted by durkadurka33
You can't demonstrate that the COMPUTER is choosing just because a person could choose.
I can, because I am defining "choosing" (and "option") in a way that both computers
and people choose.
Quote:
That's like saying that a rock can kill a person, so it's responsible for murder because a person can be responsible for murder.
No, that's the crucial point!
A rock does not choose in the sense Deep Blue chooses or a person chooses.
A rock does not run complicated choosing-algorithms in order to decide where to fall.
Quote:
I agree that a person in the same spot as Blue could choose differently than the computer. However, the key point is that the person in Blue's spot could really choose more than one of the 'valid' moves (= disjuncts).
I am assuming that both the person and Deep Blue act according to deterministic laws.
The person chooses differently because she doesn't run the same algorithm as Deep Blue. That's why there are options and responsability: Different people (or machines) choose different actions, i.e. the outcome depends on the internal decision mechanism of the person/machine.
Quote:
This is choice: selection from a range of options. To Blue, there isn't actually a 'range' even though you define a 'range of valid moves' each of the valid moves is not an 'option' to Blue since its algorithm will forever only output the same move...
But so what? Why is it only an option if it might change its mind in exactly the same spot?
I define an option as an action that could be chosen by a different person/maching in exactly the same situation (i.e. all the external states of the world are the same but the internal decision mechanism is different).
What's the problem with this definition and how does it preclude responsability?
Quote:
so the other valid moves aren't live 'options' to Blue. But, they're live options to the person (probably because the person isn't perfectly rational).
Again, I'm giving you the definition of "option" and "choosing" that I apply in my deterministic model.
I know that you disagree with my definitions, but you have yet to give me a good reason why yours are better than mine.