From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!psinntp!scylla!daryl Tue Mar 24 09:55:48 EST 1992
Article 4464 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!psinntp!scylla!daryl
>From: daryl@oracorp.com (Daryl McCullough)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Definition of understanding
Message-ID: <1992Mar15.062235.29723@oracorp.com>
Date: 15 Mar 92 06:22:35 GMT
Organization: ORA Corporation
Lines: 37

michael@psych.toronto.edu (Michael Gemar) writes:

> Again, I think you miss the point of Searle's argument.  He is,
> essentially, taking Turing up on his suggestion in "Computing
> Machinery and Intelligence" that the only way to determine if a
> computer is conscious is to *be* the machine.  This is *exactly* what
> the Chinese Room example attempts to do.  The question that the
> Chinese Room example asks is "If *you* were the man inside, would
> *you* understand?". No reference to how we determine if *others*
> understand is needed. This point is explicitly made in Searle's
> original paper. This is not an "Other Minds" problem.  Thus, Searle
> tries to avoid the very real problems of defining "understanding".
> All you have to do is determine if *you* would have it in the CR
> situation.

Okay, I think I have finally understood what you have been trying to
say, Michael. What I have been assuming all along was that Searle was
trying to prove

   (A) No system in the Chinese Room understands Chinese.

On the other hand, you are assuming that Searle is trying to prove
something much weaker:

   (B) There exists a system in the Chinese Room that doesn't
       understand Chinese (namely, the mind of the man executing
       the rules).

I agree with point B; it seems obviously true to me. I agree that I
(the mind of Daryl McCullough) would not acquire the ability to
understand Chinese by executing certain rules. However, the claim of
Strong AI is not that *I* would acquire such understanding, but that I
would produce a *new* mind that did have such understanding.

Daryl McCullough
ORA Corp.
Ithaca, NY


