Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!rutgers!rochester!yamauchi
From: yamauchi@cs.rochester.edu (Brian Yamauchi)
Newsgroups: comp.ai
Subject: Re: Can humans "understand" mathematics
Message-ID: <1989Dec17.232827.10440@cs.rochester.edu>
Date: 17 Dec 89 23:28:27 GMT
References: <3120@uceng.uc.edu> <130200002@peg> <20778@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU>
Reply-To: yamauchi@cs.rochester.edu (Brian Yamauchi)
Organization: University of Rochester Computer Science Department
Lines: 20

In article <20778@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> ladkin@icsib (Peter Ladkin) writes:
>In article <130200002@peg>, ggast@peg writes:
>>    I agree entirely that Searle is missing something.Everyone who has 
>>    learnt  a foreign language will know immediately what I  mean.
>
>i'm quite sure that searle is aware of most of these obvious points, and
>has answered them. it seems appropriate, before deciding what potential
>weaknesses his arguments have, to ask him about them.

He replies to many of them in an article in Mind Design (edited by
Haugeland).  The article is worth reading if you're interested in the
Chinese Room debate, but I think a couple of his replies completely
miss the point -- in particular his reply to the robot reply and his
reply to the systems reply.

_______________________________________________________________________________

Brian Yamauchi				University of Rochester
yamauchi@cs.rochester.edu		Computer Science Department
_______________________________________________________________________________