From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!convex!constellation!a.cs.okstate.edu!onstott Mon Mar  9 18:33:19 EST 1992
Article 4084 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!convex!constellation!a.cs.okstate.edu!onstott
>From: onstott@a.cs.okstate.edu (ONSTOTT CHARLES OR)
Subject: Re: Definition of understanding
References: <1992Feb26.190407.5123@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu> <1992Feb27.025740.8034@a.cs.okstate.edu> <1992Feb27.182302.5525@ccu.umanitoba.ca>
Message-ID: <1992Feb27.195843.8254@a.cs.okstate.edu>
Organization: Oklahoma State University, Computer Science, Stillwater
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 92 19:58:43 GMT

In article <1992Feb27.182302.5525@ccu.umanitoba.ca> zirdum@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Antun Zirdum) writes:
>In article <1992Feb27.025740.8034@a.cs.okstate.edu> onstott@a.cs.okstate.edu (ONSTOTT CHARLES OR) writes:
>>In other words, can the system, non chinese speaking, generate its own
>>questions out of its own curiosity, or better still, can the system 
>>translate from its native tongue to that of chinese?  It appears that
>>this debate is only focusing on the fact that the inputs are already 
>>in chinese and that the outputs are chinese.  It seems to ignore that
>>the system is uncapable of translating from its own language to another(that
>>of Chinese).  
>>
>NOTE: The system's language *IS* Chinese!!!
>Repeat after me slowly "The system speaks Chinese, not English!"
  Ok, then you are changing the system from the one that Searle is talking
about because in Searle's system the man in the room speaks english.
In any event, repeat after me slowly, "IT Doesn't Matter, because this
makes a special case"  That is to say, using a systems argument, if a
person spoke english and then knew rules for taking in squiggles and putting
out squaggles; systems argumentation holds that the system still understands
chinese, although the individual does not.  The point still remains in
tact, aside from your in ability to admit it, that the person in the room 
can not generate new sentences in chinese free from context, nor could it.
translate.  Your argumenetation MUST accomodate this situation or else it 
doesn't say anything at all Anton.
>>
>>There is a creative component inherent in understanding that seems to
>>be entirely ignored.  I could, for example, purchase a book on 
>>set theory and site examples from that book over the internet and impress
>>on people that I indeed understand set theory.  However, I do not know
>>anything about set theory and, thus, I can not claim to understand it.
>>If I did know something about set theory, I could not claim to understand
>>it until I was able to apply it creatively to a problem.  Passing tokens
>>around blindily in no way indicates understanding, rather application
>>and origination of those tokens does.  
>>
>Absolutely, If the system only spouts sentences without being able
>to answer questions *in an efficient, understandable way* then
>I would be the first to say that the machine is *NOT* intelligent!
>
>There is no requirement for any intelligent person to be a causal
>agent! I am aware of several mathematical savants that would
>never initiate an investigation, but when asked a question
>and they answer it, there is no doubt in any persons mind
>that there is *some* kind of vast intelligence at work!
>
  But, Anton, we aren't talking about intelligence, we are talking about
understanding.  Unless, of course, you hold them to be the same thing.

BCnya,
  Charles O. Onstott, III

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles O. Onstott, III                  P.O. Box 2386
Undergraduate in Philosophy              Stillwater, Ok  74076
Oklahoma State University                onstott@a.cs.okstate.edu


"The most abstract system of philosophy is, in its method and purpose, 
nothing more than an extremely ingenious combination of natural sounds."
                                              -- Carl G. Jung
-----------------------------------------------------------------------


