From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!torn!utgpu!utcsri!rpi!gatech!ncar!noao!amethyst!organpipe.uug.arizona.edu!organpipe.uug.arizona.edu!bill Tue Jun 23 13:20:59 EDT 1992
Article 6288 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!torn!utgpu!utcsri!rpi!gatech!ncar!noao!amethyst!organpipe.uug.arizona.edu!organpipe.uug.arizona.edu!bill
>From: bill@nsma.arizona.edu (Bill Skaggs)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Transducers
Message-ID: <BILL.92Jun17123907@ca1.nsma.arizona.edu>
Date: 17 Jun 92 19:39:07 GMT
References: <1992Jun10.203412.19158@news.Hawaii.Edu> <6980@pkmab.se>
	<1992Jun17.132117.9273@Princeton.EDU>
Sender: news@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu
Organization: ARL Division of Neural Systems, Memory and Aging, University of
	Arizona
Lines: 32
In-Reply-To: harnad@phoenix.Princeton.EDU's message of 17 Jun 92 13: 21:17 GMT

harnad@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Stevan Harnad) writes:

SH>   Logical point: A TT-passing computer alone has no mind (Searle's Argument)
SH>   Logical point: The meanings of the symbols in a computer alone are
SH>		  ungrounded; they are parasitic on the interpretations
SH>		  we creatures with minds project on them
SH>   Logical point: A TTT-passing robot is immune to Searle's Argument
SH>		  and the meanings of its symbols are grounded in its capacity
SH>		  to discriminate, identify, and manipulate the objects,
SH>		  events and states of affairs that they are
SH>		  systematically interpretable as being about


Suppose we have a TT-passing computer, and we give it a "slave" -- a
man who tells the computer everything he perceives and does everything
the computer tells him to.  This gives the computer the capacity to
discriminate, identify, and manipulate the objects etc. that its
symbols are systematically interpretable as being about.  

Does giving the computer a slave give it a mind?  If not, why not?

I now proceed to give what I expect will be your answer:  "No, the
computer still doesn't have a mind.  It doesn't do transduction, and a
system has to transduce in order to have a mind."

If you said that, I would respond:  "But the system consisting of
computer plus slave *does* do transduction, so the system has a mind
(different from the mind of the slave), right?"

Have I gone astray?

	-- Bill


