Article View: comp.ai
Article #8646Re: Sci. American AI debate: No Contest
From: Mike Tanner
Date: Mon, 08 Jan 1990 14:03
Date: Mon, 08 Jan 1990 14:03
19 lines
1370 bytes
1370 bytes
[I tried to post this right after reading Harnad's note, but our news poster blew up somehow. I think my point has been raised since then, but it's important so I'll say it again anyway.] In article <12679@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> harnad@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Stevan Harnad) writes: > Searle's Argument comes out on top again. Searle doesn't have an argument. He has an assertion -- understanding can never arise from formal symbol manipulation -- which he takes to be obviously true and proceeds to talk all around it for page after page. Whether it's true or not, so what? As an argument against AI it's powerless. It confuses a model of computation with the real thing. Programs running on real computers are *not* formal symbol manipulators. -- mike
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<TANNER.90Jan8090333@cheops.cis.ohio-state.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!shadooby!samsung!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!cheops.cis.ohio-state.edu!tannerReferences:
<12679@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> <199@fornax.UUCP>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!shadooby!samsung!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!cheops.cis.ohio-state.edu!tanner From: tanner@cheops.cis.ohio-state.edu (Mike Tanner) Newsgroups: comp.ai Subject: Re: Sci. American AI debate: No Contest Message-ID: <TANNER.90Jan8090333@cheops.cis.ohio-state.edu> Date: 8 Jan 90 14:03:33 GMT References: <12679@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> <199@fornax.UUCP> Sender: news@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu Organization: Ohio State Computer Science Lines: 19 In-reply-to: jones@fornax.UUCP's message of 5 Jan 90 18:41:20 GMT