Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!ucsd!helios.ee.lbl.gov!nosc!humu!uhccux!lee
From: lee@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu (Greg Lee)
Newsgroups: comp.ai
Subject: Re: Question on Chinese Room Argument
Message-ID: <3701@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu>
Date: 9 Apr 89 18:55:02 GMT
References: <16873@cup.portal.com>
Organization: University of Hawaii
Lines: 21

From article <16873@cup.portal.com>, by dan-hankins@cup.portal.com (Daniel B Hankins):
" >When I compile a program, assembly language with symbols is produced,
" ...
"      The problem is with the representation relation, which the computer
" does not embody.  No representation, no symbols.  A symbol that means
" nothing is no symbol at all.

So a label which is the target of a branch instruction does not
represent anything, eh.  Not even a location in the program?  Are you
under the impression that you are making sense here?  Let me disabuse
you.

Look, I know what's coming next.  Just as earlier we were treated to a
distinction between understanding of the ordinary sort which a computer
can display and "true" understanding with an essential subjective
element, now you're going to say the things in an assembly language
program aren't "true" symbols.  There's some special human magic I
invest in symbols when I write a program that compilers can never know.
So you can spare us the usual mumbo-jumbo.

			Greg, lee@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu