From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mcsun!uknet!edcastle!aiai!jeff Thu Jan 16 17:21:47 EST 1992
Article 2724 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mcsun!uknet!edcastle!aiai!jeff
>From: jeff@aiai.ed.ac.uk (Jeff Dalton)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: instantiation of programs
Message-ID: <5985@skye.ed.ac.uk>
Date: 14 Jan 92 22:19:48 GMT
References: <5815@skye.ed.ac.uk> <1991Dec12.193222.27298@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu> <5909@skye.ed.ac.uk> <1992Jan10.005426.24694@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu> <5949@skye.ed.ac.uk> <60274@aurs01.UUCP>
Reply-To: jeff@aiai.UUCP (Jeff Dalton)
Organization: AIAI, University of Edinburgh, Scotland
Lines: 11

In article <60274@aurs01.UUCP> throop@aurs01.UUCP (Wayne Throop) writes:
>> From: jeff@aiai.ed.ac.uk (Jeff Dalton)
>> I don't see much problem with saying a computer instantiates
>> a program, but let that go.
>
>But-but-but...... computers *don't* instantiate programs.  They
>instantiate processes.  

Maybe so.  I just don't think much of importance turns on that
word in Searle's arguments.  But then I'm not even sure exactly
what he means by it.


