Xref: utzoo comp.ai:3157 talk.religion.misc:10394
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!uwvax!rutgers!gatech!purdue!bu-cs!mirror!rayssd!raybed2!linus!mbunix!bwk
From: bwk@mbunix.mitre.org (Barry W. Kort)
Newsgroups: comp.ai,talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Elementary AI Philosophy
Summary: Homunculi need not apply.
Keywords: Understanding and Comprehension, Reality and Modeling
Message-ID: <43763@linus.UUCP>
Date: 21 Jan 89 13:46:39 GMT
References: <18464@santra.UUCP> <1241@arctic.nprdc.arpa> <904@ubu.warwick.UUCP> <9423@ihlpb.ATT.COM>
Sender: news@linus.UUCP
Reply-To: bwk@mbunix.mitre.org (Barry Kort)
Organization: IdeaSync, Inc., Chronos, VT
Lines: 37

In article <9423@ihlpb.ATT.COM> arm@ihlpb.UUCP (Alex Macalalad) 
responds to Mike Taylor's comments about the Chinese Room.  Alex writes:

 > [Searle] assumes that in order for a computer to be intelligent,
 > there must be something inside the computer that "understands." 
 > Of course, that isn't the case.  That would be like assuming a
 > little man inside my head that "understands" for me so that I
 > can be intelligent.  If and when an intelligent computer is
 > constructed, it will not be the program which will understand,
 > nor the processor.  It will be the computer as a whole.

There *can* be "something inside the computer that `understands'",
but that something need not be thought of as a "homunculus".

If we substitute the word "comprehend" for "understand", we have
a better chance of seeing how a computer can have an idea of how
things work out there in the real world.  The verb "to comprehend"
means "to capture with".  In my mind, and in the mind of my
computer, I construct models which replicate the structure and
behavior of real-world objects.  I capture (comprehend) reality
with such models.

As to intelligence, that step follows easily after I have a working
model.  I can now do "thought experiments" on the model to find
out what will happen if I diddle the controls on the model, or
if I perturb the operating environment in which the model is
embedded.  I call this "cognition".  (Some people call it
model-based reasoning, or modal logic.)

While we are on the point of capturing ideas with models, let us
take note of two other captivating terms.  The word, "phenomenal"
means "to capture with the senses."  Contrast that well-known
word with its lesser-known counterpart, "noumenal", which means
"to capture with thought."  Theories are the product of noumenal
processes.

--Barry Kort