Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!elbereth.rutgers.edu!harnad From: harnad@elbereth.rutgers.edu (Stevan Harnad) Newsgroups: comp.ai Subject: Re: Question on Chinese Room Argument Summary: This is not a linguistic matter Message-ID: Date: 22 Feb 89 06:03:31 GMT References: <3305@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu> Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J. Lines: 34 lee@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu (Greg Lee) of University of Hawaii wrote: " I can't agree [that "in the Chinese Room there is first-person " evidence available that there's NO Chinese understanding going on in " there"] except as a terminological point... to characterize the way " 'understand' is ordinarily used... When we know the mechanism behind " the behavior, we don't usually speak of 'understanding'... when one " chooses not to think or talk in terms of mechanism, 'understand' is " still often appropriate. And we do develop new usages... as here when " some come to be willing to attribute understanding to the Chinese " room... Philosophers doing second-rate linguistics can be trying. There are two senses of "understand," a subjective and an objective one. The first (1) is what I mean when I say "I understand English" and the second (2) is what I mean when I say "He understands English." The first is primary. What I say and mean by "I understand" is based on direct, incorrigible, first-person evidence. When I say "HE understands," I am merely INFERRING that what's true of him is the same thing that's true of me when I understand. I can be WRONG (very wrong) about (2) but not about (1). It is (1) that is at issue in Searle's Argument, though people keep conflating it with (2). That's all there is to it. It's not a matter for linguists (any more than what I mean by "I am in pain" vs. "He is in pain" is). The only ones who worry about mechanisms here are cognitive modelers. And I am not a philosopher. -- Stevan Harnad INTERNET: harnad@confidence.princeton.edu harnad@princeton.edu srh@flash.bellcore.com harnad@elbereth.rutgers.edu harnad@princeton.uucp BITNET: harnad@pucc.bitnet CSNET: harnad%princeton.edu@relay.cs.net (609)-921-7771