Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!ncrlnk!ncrcae!hubcap!gatech!unmvax!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!decwrl!labrea!polya!geddis From: geddis@polya.Stanford.EDU (Donald F. Geddis) Newsgroups: comp.ai Subject: Re: Where might CR understanding come from (if it exists) Message-ID: <7847@polya.Stanford.EDU> Date: 18 Mar 89 06:42:58 GMT References: <9560@megaron.arizona.edu> <2568@crete.cs.glasgow.ac.uk> <4079@xyzzy.UUCP> <2599@crete.cs.glasgow.ac.uk> Sender: Donald F. Geddis Reply-To: geddis@polya.Stanford.EDU (Donald F. Geddis) Organization: Stanford University Lines: 27 In article <2599@crete.cs.glasgow.ac.uk> gilbert@cs.glasgow.ac.uk (Gilbert Cockton) writes: >Usually, a system possesses attributes which no part *CAN* possess, >and thus does not possess. > >Here, the part Searle can possess understanding. > >The issue is one of attributes common to a/some part(s) and the >emergeant system. I don't know an example where a system has >attributes that a part CAN have, but does not have. Counterexample: The program MACSYMA running on a particular computer has the attribute CAN-SOLVE-SYMBOLIC-CALCULUS-EQUATIONS (CSSCE attribute). Now, give me a copy of the source code for MACSYMA and I'll hand-simulate it. Now the system (Me + Source Code) can solve all sorts of complex equations that I alone can't. However, I do have the capacity to have the CSSCE attribute, I just don't happen to have it at this moment. So there's an example where a system has attributes that a part can have, but does not have. -- Don -- Geddis@Polya.Stanford.Edu "Ticking away the moments that make up a dull day..." -- Pink Floyd