Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!aplcen!haven!udel!princeton!phoenix!kpfleger From: kpfleger@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Karl Robert Pfleger) Newsgroups: comp.ai Subject: Re: Sci. American AI debate Message-ID: <12667@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> Date: 4 Jan 90 23:07:12 GMT References: <85384@linus.UUCP> <16577@megaron.cs.arizona.edu> Reply-To: kpfleger@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Karl Robert Pfleger) Organization: Princeton University, NJ Lines: 29 In article <16577@megaron.cs.arizona.edu> mike@cs.arizona.edu (Mike Coffin) writes: >Second, it seems to me that Searle has set a tough task for >himself---to "prove" logically his contention. That is tough because >he is trying to prove something about "thought", a term that he never >defines. Without a definition he will never produce a very convincing >proof. The other side is in much better shape because they only have My reaction to reading the Searle article was exactly identical to reading his earlier paper, Minds, brains, and programs, _Behavioral and Brain Sciences_, 1980. He's just arguing semantics. His whole point is about definitions, and as pointed out above, he never provides any. The word I thought everything hinged on was 'understand.' He doesn't even argue whether or not a system could be created which answers every question correctly like the chinese room; he just concedes it and then yells that it would't 'understand.' My opinion: If it answers every question correctly, I don't care what you call it. If you don't want to call it 'understanding,' fine. I think it's pretty significant. The second article I thought was much more interesting and pertinent. It dealt with the altogether more important (in my opinion) question--can we get the system to produce all the right answers, and how. It was also the first actual explanation I have seen of parallel (or simplistic neural-net) approaches. After hearing so much from that area, but not bothering to look into it, a simple explanation was very welcomed. -Karl kpfleger@phoenix.princeton.edu kpfleger@pucc (bitnet)