From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!spool.mu.edu!uunet!ogicse!das.harvard.edu!husc-news.harvard.edu!zariski!zeleny Mon Dec  9 10:48:40 EST 1991
Article 1927 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!spool.mu.edu!uunet!ogicse!das.harvard.edu!husc-news.harvard.edu!zariski!zeleny
>From: zeleny@zariski.harvard.edu (Mikhail Zeleny)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Searle and the Chinese Room
Message-ID: <1991Dec6.235835.6252@husc3.harvard.edu>
Date: 7 Dec 91 04:58:33 GMT
Article-I.D.: husc3.1991Dec6.235835.6252
References: <1991Dec5.225949.2613@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu> <1991Dec6.174522.6237@husc3.harvard.edu> <1991Dec7.011330.8298@mp.cs.niu.edu>
Organization: Dept. of Math, Harvard Univ.
Lines: 61
Nntp-Posting-Host: zariski.harvard.edu

rickert@mp.cs.niu.edu (Neil Rickert) writes:

>zeleny@coolidge.harvard.edu (Mikhail Zeleny) writes:

>>chalmers@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (David Chalmers) writes:

DC:
>>>Reflection on why this argument is fallacious should lead one to
>>>uncover the fallacy in Searle's analogous argument.

MZ:
>>Reflection on why this argument is fallacious should lead one to
>>uncover your failure to understand what Searle is talking about.

NR:
> No.  It is your failure to understand Dave's point which illustrates you
>are as confused as is Searle.  Although I flippantly criticized his
>assumption (1), his analogy is right on target.  However you are unable to
>see his point because you have too many preconceived notions which you
>are unable to cast off, and which distort your thinking.

I'll only say this once, so I'll try to make it clear.  The difference
between people like Dalton, Gudeman, and myself, on one hand, and the
people like Chalmers, McCarthy, McDermott, and yourself, on the other hand,
is that the former take the trouble to use specialized terminology in its
conventionally agreed upon sense, while the latter are happy to blather
senselessly about semantics, personality, and, above all, understanding,
without manifesting any evidence of having perused Locke's Essay, much less
more modern treatments of these subjects.

What you mistakenly take to be my preconceived notions are in fact the
results of two and a half millenia of analytical inquiry; anyone who isn't
prepared to take philosophical concepts seriously has no business
conducting a philosophical discussion.  If I want to engage McCarthy on the
subject of circumscription, I try to make sure that I understand what he is
talking about; this not just a matter of common courtesy, but, more
importantly, a matter of interpretive charity.  What makes you think that
you can make any sensible observations about Searle if you steadfastly
refuse to understand his idea of understanding?  If you want to continue
this discussion, better give me some evidence of your good faith; otherwise
feel free to join your colleagues clamoring for a "philosopher-to-English
dictionary".  End of this discourse.

>-- 
>=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
>  Neil W. Rickert, Computer Science               <rickert@cs.niu.edu>
>  Northern Illinois Univ.
>  DeKalb, IL 60115                                   +1-815-753-6940


`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'
: Qu'est-ce qui est bien?  Qu'est-ce qui est laid?         Harvard   :
: Qu'est-ce qui est grand, fort, faible...                 doesn't   :
: Connais pas! Connais pas!                                 think    :
:                                                             so     :
: Mikhail Zeleny                                                     :
: 872 Massachusetts Ave., Apt. 707                                   :
: Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139           (617) 661-8151            :
: email zeleny@zariski.harvard.edu or zeleny@HUMA1.BITNET            :
:                                                                    :
'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`


