From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!sdd.hp.com!samsung!munnari.oz.au!bunyip.cc.uq.oz.au!helios!house Tue Jan 21 09:27:30 EST 1992
Article 2927 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Xref: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca comp.ai.philosophy:2927 sci.philosophy.tech:1917 sci.logic:838
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!sdd.hp.com!samsung!munnari.oz.au!bunyip.cc.uq.oz.au!helios!house
>From: house@helios.usq.EDU.AU (ron house)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy,sci.philosophy.tech,sci.logic
Subject: Re: How to outdo Roger Penrose
Message-ID: <house.695875887@helios>
Date: 20 Jan 92 02:51:27 GMT
References: <1992Jan13.022633.11107@milton.u.washington.edu> <1992Jan13.222623.373@convex.com> <house.695437968@helios> <1992Jan16.161518.19735@convex.com>
Lines: 28

cash@convex.com (Peter Cash) writes:

>In article <house.695437968@helios> house@helios.usq.EDU.AU (ron house) writes:
>...
>>But whatever Penrose does he loses the 'mark'.  So perhaps he would
>>bring in some other consideration.  If the goal is to beat the other
>>player overall, he might write 'no', knowing it to be wrong and
>>knowing that the other player will probably write 'no' also, thus
>>losing points for both players, and hoping to score higher on other
>>questions.  The point is he can think creatively about the problem,
>>and cut at tangents across the logic.

>But to do so he has to break the rules. The point of a logic problem is to
>operate within the stated constraints. You can object that the problem is
>irrelevant, or that it doesn't make the point Daryl says it does--but you
>can't violate the terms of the problem and claim to have resolved it. 

He hasn't broken the rules, just given a wrong answer.

>If that were allowed, I suppose Searle could just pull out a gun and shoot
>his opponent...

No, only 'yes' or 'no' permitted.   :-)

--

Ron House.                 USQ
(house@helios.usq.edu.au)  Toowoomba, Australia.


