Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!asuvax!noao!ncar!ico!ism780c!news
From: news@ism780c.isc.com (News system)
Newsgroups: comp.ai
Subject: Re: Hayes vs. Searle
Message-ID: <43860@ism780c.isc.com>
Date: 13 Jun 90 18:27:33 GMT
References: <16875@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> <2629@skye.ed.ac.uk> <16960@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> <2687@skye.ed.ac.uk> <17046@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> <2750@skye.ed.ac.uk>
Reply-To: marv@ism780.UUCP (Marvin Rubenstein)
Organization: Interactive Systems Corp., Santa Monica CA
Lines: 47

In article <2750@skye.ed.ac.uk> jeff@aiai.UUCP (Jeff Dalton) writes:
>Nonetheless, if we did have a computer that understood merely by
>instantiating the right program (Searle's actual claim is at least
>close to that), we could print the program, thus producing the
>book.  So if you can show that the book can't exist, it seems to
>me that you'll also show that the program can't exist, hence making
>the point against strong AI another way.  So the people who would
>like to refute Searle wouldn't end up better off, although it
>might change which person was going around doing chat shows, etc.

I believe Searle is correct in that a machine mearly executing a program
cannot exibit inteligent behavior.  In order to be inteligent one must react
to the environment in a reasonable way.  After all "only mad dogs and
English men go out in the noon day sun".

The problem with the CR is that Serale posits that the room could work
without the ability to sense the environment.  This is what I feel is wrong
with the argument.  The ability to sense the environment is essential.
Lacking that ability a conversion might look like this.  (written in
English)

  Q: Is is raining?
  A: I cannot compute an answer.
  Q: Is this question submitted on green paper?
  A: I cannot compute an answer.

Given a set of questions and answers like the above one would conclude the
CR is not inteligent.  If we allow the CR to sense the environment then the
book could the be written to cope with questions like the above.  One
solution would be to have instructions like the following.  (I use <> to
enclose Chinese text).

   If (the_question == <is it raining>) {
      look outside.
      if (it_is_raning) answer <yes>
      else answer <no>
   }

What is more the CR operator would in time come to know that <yes> means
"yes" and <no> means "no".  And probably could even compute that <is it
raining> means "is it raining".  i.e., the operator would come to understand
Chinese just like other people come to understand Chinese.

I would like to see if Searle believes that the ECR (extended Chinese room)
could not be built with a non-human as the operator.

     Marv Rubinstein