Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Path: utzoo!decvax!ucbvax!OHIO-STATE.ARPA!tanner
From: tanner@OHIO-STATE.ARPA (Mike Tanner)
Newsgroups: mod.ai
Subject: Re: Searle's logic
Message-ID: <8610101557.AA08123@ohio-state.ARPA>
Date: Fri, 10-Oct-86 11:57:31 EDT
Article-I.D.: ohio-sta.8610101557.AA08123
Posted: Fri Oct 10 11:57:31 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 11-Oct-86 00:31:34 EDT
References: <8610060618.AA12878@ucbvax>
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: osu-eddie!tanner (Mike Tanner)
Organization: The Ohio State University, CIS Dept.
Lines: 14
Approved: ailist@sri-stripe.arpa

Pat Hayes made some cogent remarks about Searle's problems with AI
being much deeper than the discussion here would indicate.  But I
wonder whether the argument is worth the effort.

I have a lot of work to do and only so much time.  I can work just
fine on problems of intelligence without worrying about Searle's (or
Dreyfus's) complaints.  Just as the working physicist can work all day
without once being bothered by the question of whether quarks *really*
exist, so the working AIer can make progress on his problems without
being bothered by Searle.

-- mike

tanner@ohio-state.arpa