Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!lll-winken!uunet!portal!cup.portal.com!dan-hankins
From: dan-hankins@cup.portal.com (Daniel B Hankins)
Newsgroups: comp.ai
Subject: Re: Question on Chinese Room Argument
Message-ID: <16878@cup.portal.com>
Date: 8 Apr 89 20:15:04 GMT
References: <10992@bcsaic.UUCP>
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
Lines: 35

In article <2705@crete.cs.glasgow.ac.uk> gilbert@cs.glasgow.ac.uk
(Gilbert Cockton) writes:

>What is true is that causation in human/animal behaviour, and causation in
>physics, are very different types of cause (explanatory dualism).

     Oh _really_.  Your body is made up of subatomic particles.  Your
behavior consists of the operation of these particles according to the
'laws' of physics.  For causation in macro-level behavior to be of a
different type than that of particle physics, you would have to be able to
perform some action not in accordance with the predictions of particle
physics.  That is, you would have to violate physical law in order to
follow some other.

     I wasn't aware of anomalous particle behavior in organic systems.  I
should think news of that caliber would be hard to miss.

     Your body is a _completely_ physical system.  Therefore it is
governed _completely_ by physical laws.  I don't know what these other laws
of yours are, but I can see no good reason for supposing them when physical
law explains all your behavior quite adequately.


>As 'mind' was not designed, and not by us more importantly, it is not
>fully understood for any of its activities ('brains' are of course, e.g.
>sleep regulation).  Hence we cannot yet build an equivalent artefact until
>we understand it.

     Nuts.  I suppose the first caveman to build a fire had a complete
understanding of it?


Dan Hankins

"Communication is only possible between equals." - H. Celine