Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!oliveb!apple!vsi1!wyse!mips!prls!philabs!linus!mbunix!bwk From: bwk@mbunix.mitre.org (Barry W. Kort) Newsgroups: comp.ai Subject: Re: Question on Chinese Room Argument Summary: What about illustrations? Keywords: Voynich Manuscript, Codex Serafinianus Message-ID: <45946@linus.UUCP> Date: 6 Mar 89 02:02:16 GMT References: <4298@pt.cs.cmu.edu> <7408@polya.Stanford.EDU> Sender: news@linus.UUCP Reply-To: bwk@mbunix.mitre.org (Barry Kort) Organization: IdeaSync, Inc., Chronos, VT Lines: 17 I would like to ask another question about the Chinese Room protocol. As given by Searle, the Chinese stories are not illustrated. But we all know that children learn to read using illustrated stories. The text is intimately linked to the pictures. By this device, textual symbols come to be associated with objects and actions familiar from other sensory channels. Could it be that the Chinese Room is like scientists puzzling over heiroglyphics before they discovered the Rosetta Stone? In _Labyrinths of Reason_, William Poundstone describes the Voynich manuscript, which is handwritten in an unknown language. Like, Codex Serafinianus, it is lavishly illustrated, yet no one can decipher the meaning of the text. Feynman, on the other hand, did decipher a codex which turned out to be an astronomical almanac. It would appear that understanding is no mean feat. --Barry Kort