Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!src.honeywell.com!msi.umn.edu!cs.umn.edu!thornley From: thornley@cs.umn.edu (David H. Thornley) Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy Subject: Re: Searle's Chinese Room Message-ID: <1990Nov19.193238.511@cs.umn.edu> Date: 19 Nov 90 19:32:38 GMT References: <16197@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> <3952@media-lab.MEDIA.MIT.EDU> <10297@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV> <3488@aipna.ed.ac.uk> <86001@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu> Organization: University of Minnesota, Minneapolis - CSCI Dept. Lines: 20 In article <86001@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu> Todd R Johnson writes: >.... In other >words, if we are to produce intelligent artifacts we MUST be willing >to accept the fact that we need to create special software AND >hardware. This seems quite reasonable. In fact, I don't see how >anyone can disagree with it. > > ---Todd > If you mean that we need adequate hardware to create intelligence, yes, but nobody has ever claimed that a lawn chair can be made to think with the appropriate algorithms. (OK, I'm probably wrong, but no serious AI researcher has while speaking professionally :-) If you mean that we necessarily need specific hardware not normally found in modern computers, it is easy to disagree with. It seems very likely to me that a powerful enough modern computer, with the adequate software, could "think," in a useful sense of that word. DHT