From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!wupost!uunet!psinntp!scylla!daryl Mon Mar  9 18:34:16 EST 1992
Article 4172 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!wupost!uunet!psinntp!scylla!daryl
>From: daryl@oracorp.com
Subject: Re: Definition of understanding
Message-ID: <1992Feb29.204525.1685@oracorp.com>
Organization: ORA Corporation
Date: Sat, 29 Feb 1992 20:45:25 GMT

Mikhail Zeleny writes:

> Get a dose of reality.  The AI research program has failed many
> times over; one department after another seeks to find refuge in a
> name change (does "cognitive science" really sound any better?); when
> was the last time you saw an horde of investors get hardons at the
> mere mention of expert systems?

> It seems that the powers that be have surely been converted.

Come on, Mikhail, do you really think that funding for AI has dropped
because of Searle's *philosophical* arguments?There are two very
different points that you are confusing: one is the philosophical
issues involved in AI, and the other is the practical issues. If you
told me that funding for AI is likely to produce artificial
intelligence any time soon, I would probably agree with you. However,
if you claimed that AI was inherently impossible, then I would have to
disagree strongly.

You must be confusing comp.ai.philosophy with comp.ai.funding.

Daryl McCullough
ORA Corp.
Ithaca, NY








