From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!paperboy.osf.org!hsdndev!husc-news.harvard.edu!zariski!zeleny Tue Apr  7 23:24:18 EDT 1992
Article 4936 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Xref: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca sci.philosophy.tech:2514 comp.ai.philosophy:4936
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!paperboy.osf.org!hsdndev!husc-news.harvard.edu!zariski!zeleny
>From: zeleny@zariski.harvard.edu (Mikhail Zeleny)
Newsgroups: sci.philosophy.tech,comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: A rock implements every FSA
Message-ID: <1992Apr6.114955.10762@husc3.harvard.edu>
Date: 6 Apr 92 15:49:53 GMT
References: <OZ.92Apr1000020@ursa.sis.yorku.ca> <1992Apr1.081958.10553@husc3.harvard.edu> <6741@pkmab.se>
Organization: Dept. of Math, Harvard Univ.
Lines: 50
Nntp-Posting-Host: zariski.harvard.edu

In article <6741@pkmab.se> 
ske@pkmab.se (Kristoffer Eriksson) writes:

>In article <1992Apr1.081958.10553@husc3.harvard.edu>
>zeleny@zariski.harvard.edu (Mikhail Zeleny) writes: 

MZ:
>>I note that any description of Chalmers' wacky notion of implementation is
>>conspicuously absent from the above.

KE:
>As if it was less wacky to hold the view that a rock counts as an
>implementation of each and every FSA...

Consider the notion of "reductio ad absurdum".

KE:
>Whatever the correct notion of implementation may be, I think it should
>be one that excludes arbitrary rocks, otherwise it simply is useless, and
>definitely does not capture the thing we use this notion for.

Agreed, but this doesn't exclude the possibility that the correct notion of
implementation, like the related notion of interpretation, or the
fundamental notion of reference, is simply unavailable to a run-of-the-mill
functionalist.  Chalmers may yet escape this quagmire, if he chooses to
trade his "reluctant dualism" for a full-blown Fregean troilism; however it
seems that every reductive or eliminative materialist will be stuck with a
Davidson-like inscrutability of implementation.

>-- 
>Kristoffer Eriksson, Peridot Konsult AB, Hagagatan 6, S-703 40 Oerebro, Sweden
>Phone: +46 19-13 03 60  !  e-mail: ske@pkmab.se
>Fax:   +46 19-11 51 03  !  or ...!{uunet,mcsun}!mail.swip.net!kullmar!pkmab!ske

N.B.  I haven't answered your article about semantics simply because there
seems to be nothing to say, beyond reiterating that your quasi-Russellian
view admits the possibility of referring to phenomenal data only.


`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'
: 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            :
:                                                                    :
'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`


