From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!psych.toronto.edu!michael Mon Mar  9 18:35:29 EST 1992
Article 4289 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!psych.toronto.edu!michael
>From: michael@psych.toronto.edu (Michael Gemar)
Subject: Re: Definition of understanding
Organization: Department of Psychology, University of Toronto
References: <1992Mar4.143142.12977@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca> <1992Mar4.205355.26542@psych.toronto.edu> <1992Mar5.141951.10188@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca>
Message-ID: <1992Mar5.232256.26281@psych.toronto.edu>
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1992 23:22:56 GMT

In article <1992Mar5.141951.10188@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca> pindor@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca (Andrzej Pindor) writes:
>In article <1992Mar4.205355.26542@psych.toronto.edu> michael@psych.toronto.edu (Michael Gemar) writes:
>>In article <1992Mar4.143142.12977@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca> pindor@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca (Andrzej Pindor) writes:

>>>Things are not always as simple as you make them to appear. Consider some
>>>autistic people who, while appearing rather uninteligent, can nevertheless
>>>perform amazing arithmetic calculations in their heads. They are unable to
>>>explain how they do it, but no one has taught them how to do these very long
>>>multiplications, divisions etc. So, although consciously not aware of how they
>>>are doing it, they must have some subconscious understanding of aritnmethic.
>>
>>I fail to see at all what this has to do with the original discussion, as 
>>we were talking about *explicit* understanding, and *inherent* meaning
>>of symbols.
>>
>Many people, you including, object to "System's Reply" on the basis that the
>man himself does not understand Chinese and cannot explain in English what do
>squigles mean. The example I've given above shows that a part of human brain
>can understand something even if his/her consciuos part cannot explain it.
>Don't you think it is relevent to some objections to "System's Reply"?

Do the examples you cite show an understanding of the material, or merely
the ability to apply mechanical rules?  I would be much more impressed if
an autistic person could respond to someone in Chinese...:-)

- michael




