From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!csd.unb.ca!morgan.ucs.mun.ca!nstn.ns.ca!bonnie.concordia.ca!ccu.umanitoba.ca!access.usask.ca!kakwa.ucs.ualberta.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!ubc-cs!uw-beaver!pauld Thu Feb 20 15:22:12 EST 1992
Article 3873 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!bonnie.concordia.ca!ccu.umanitoba.ca!access.usask.ca!kakwa.ucs.ualberta.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!ubc-cs!uw-beaver!pauld
>From: pauld@cs.washington.edu (Paul Barton-Davis)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: intentional stance
Message-ID: <1992Feb19.184838.16302@beaver.cs.washington.edu>
Date: 19 Feb 92 18:48:38 GMT
Sender: news@beaver.cs.washington.edu (USENET News System)
Organization: Computer Science & Engineering, U. of Washington, Seattle
Lines: 9

If I were to say "intentional stance", would readers of this newsgroup
yawn, run, write some more, or say "what ?" I have no idea if
approaches to intentionality have been flogged to death here recently
- any want to provide some history, or a warning ?

-- paul
-- 
Computer Science Laboratory	  "truth is out of style" - MC 900ft Jesus
University of Washington 		<pauld@cs.washington.edu>


