From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!garrot.DMI.USherb.CA!uxa.ecn.bgu.edu!mp.cs.niu.edu!rickert Thu Feb 20 15:21:58 EST 1992
Article 3850 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!garrot.DMI.USherb.CA!uxa.ecn.bgu.edu!mp.cs.niu.edu!rickert
>From: rickert@mp.cs.niu.edu (Neil Rickert)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Definition of understanding
Message-ID: <1992Feb19.013515.26133@mp.cs.niu.edu>
Date: 19 Feb 92 01:35:15 GMT
References: <1992Feb18.153833.10164@oracorp.com> <1992Feb18.200220.21192@psych.toronto.edu>
Organization: Northern Illinois University
Lines: 17

In article <1992Feb18.200220.21192@psych.toronto.edu> christo@psych.toronto.edu (Christopher Green) writes:
>I think you're right but not in the way you intended. The question is,
>"Does the Chinese room understand *Chinese*?"
>Insofar as I understand, this is the ONLY question relevant to the Chinese
>room. It is the aritificial intelligentsia who have tried to make the
>question obscure. Searle's question was very straightforward, and Harnad's
>explication is dead on.

 All the AI people have done is try to point out that the question
"Does the Chinese room understand Chinese?" may be completely unrelated to the
question "Do the people in the Chinese room understand Chinese?"

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


