From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!csd.unb.ca!morgan.ucs.mun.ca!nstn.ns.ca!aunro!lll-winken!fnnews!mp.cs.niu.edu!linac!uchinews!spssig!markrose Thu Jan 16 17:22:13 EST 1992
Article 2763 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!csd.unb.ca!morgan.ucs.mun.ca!nstn.ns.ca!aunro!lll-winken!fnnews!mp.cs.niu.edu!linac!uchinews!spssig!markrose
>From: markrose@spss.com (Mark Rosenfelder)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Searle, again
Message-ID: <1992Jan15.192358.37288@spss.com>
Date: 15 Jan 92 19:23:58 GMT
References: <5952@skye.ed.ac.uk> <1992Jan13.200632.36402@spss.com> <5984@skye.ed.ac.uk>
Organization: SPSS, Inc.
Lines: 24
Nntp-Posting-Host: spssrs7.spss.com

In article <5984@skye.ed.ac.uk> jeff@aiai.UUCP (Jeff Dalton) writes:
>For the last time, Searle doesn't assume some mysterious "causal
>powers" exist and use that to reach his conclusion that computers
>do not understand.  He may do lots of other dubious things, but
>that isn't one of them.

You are misunderstanding me.  I don't say that Searle starts with the causal
powers and ends up with the conclusion that computers don't understand.
I say that Searle comes up with the causal powers to rescue the brain
from being reduced to meaninglessness by his own argument.  

Why doesn't the Chinese Room argument prove that brains don't think either?
It's by no means obvious how neurochemistry produces such things as 
understanding and meaning, just as it's not clear how a computer program 
could do the same thing.  If Searle doesn't watch out, he'll have created 
the equivalent of Zeno's motion paradoxes-- a way of thinking that seems to 
prove that things can't be the way they are.

Ah, but some vague talk about "causal powers," and a bit of bluster about how
"obvious" they are, will paper over the difficulty.

That's why it's important to see an argument for these "causal powers",
and not a mere assumption of them.  And he is simply assuming them, in the
Sci. Am. article: "Axiom 4.  Brains cause minds."


