Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!crdgw1!greenba From: greenba@gambia.crd.ge.com (ben a green) Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy Subject: Re: What does intentionality have that AI doesn't..... Message-ID: Date: 14 Mar 91 21:04:39 GMT References: <13503@ccncsu.ColoState.EDU> <17153@venera.isi.edu> Sender: news@crdgw1.crd.ge.com Organization: GE Corporate Research & Development Lines: 38 In-reply-to: smoliar@isi.edu's message of 14 Mar 91 19:11:37 GMT I suggest that the term "intension" or "intention" is hopelessly ambiguous and should be replaced by other terms according to what is intended: 1) "John intentionally bumped the vase to see Marsha's reaction." The common meaning. 2) "The intension of 'vase' comprises the attributes of 'can contain flowers and water' and 'is relatively tall and slender'." The meaning in logic, according to dictionaries. 3) "'The Hulk is so named because of his size' uses 'The Hulk' intensionally because the phrase cannot be replaced with the name of the wrestler and preserve meaning." Failure of substitutional transparency, as used by Quine. 4) "Intentionality is by definition that feature of certain mental states by which they are directed at or about objects and states of affairs in the world." -- John Searle, quoted by Stephen Smoliar. Problematical in that it is defined as an attribute of "mental states," a concept itself in need of definition. A "state" can be "directed at" an object, for example, or be "about" an object. Much too vague for my taste. In (1), intention is possessed by a person. In (2), intension is possessed by a term. In (3), intension is possessed by a sentence. In (4), intension is possessed by mental state. TAKE ME OUT, COACH! -- Ben A. Green, Jr. greenba@crd.ge.com Speaking only for myself, of course.