From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mcsun!unido!ira.uka.de!chx400!bernina!neptune!santas Tue Mar 24 09:56:41 EST 1992
Article 4542 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mcsun!unido!ira.uka.de!chx400!bernina!neptune!santas
>From: santas@inf.ethz.ch (Philip Santas)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Definition of understanding
Message-ID: <1992Mar17.213405.18352@neptune.inf.ethz.ch>
Date: 17 Mar 92 21:34:05 GMT
References: <1992Mar11.122705.22342@neptune.inf.ethz.ch> <1992Mar11.185921.10347@psych.toronto.edu> <1992Mar16.233438.45463@spss.com>
Sender: news@neptune.inf.ethz.ch (Mr News)
Organization: Dept. Informatik, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH)
Lines: 49
Nntp-Posting-Host: spica.inf.ethz.ch


In article <1992Mar16.233438.45463@spss.com> markrose@spss.com (Mark Rosenfelder) writes:
>In article <1992Mar11.185921.10347@psych.toronto.edu> michael@psych.toronto.edu
>(Michael Gemar) writes (quoting Philip Santas):
>>
>                                Merely typing
>>
>>Distance x = displacmentFromEquilibrium
>>
>>does not tell the computer what "distance" and "displacement from equilibrium"
>>*is*!  I could have just as easily typed:
>>
>>Qaatlus x = GwornsBleebArack
>>
>>and the program would *still* compute *both* Potential *and* electrostatic
>>energy.
>
>Exactly.  I am afraid that some AI types confuse the names of symbols with
>semantics.  The two expressions you write are strictly equivalent to the
>computer (indeed, many compilers would generate identical object code from
>them).  The first expression is intelligible to a human observer; this
>must not be confused with understanding on the part of the computer.

But the type Distance already includes information in the form
of instance variables, methods, relationship with other types etc.

It is very possible that this information alone is not enough
but this is the idea of making AI research.

>I don't think this makes artificial intelligence unattainable.  But
>if a computer understands a term, it will be because it can relate it
>to an enormous mass of information, experience, and procedures (much as
>happens in a human being), and not because the variables it uses
>have names that resemble English words.

You missed the whole argument, simply because you wanted to miss it.
Types DO include information other than their name, and this is 
what I've been trying to show. 

Philip Santas

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
email: santas@inf.ethz.ch				 Philip Santas
Mail: Dept. Informatik				Department of Computer Science
      ETH-Zentrum			  Swiss Federal Institute of Technology
      CH-8092 Zurich				       Zurich, Switzerland
      Switzerland
Phone: +41-1-2547391
      


