From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!ames!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!usc!rpi!usenet.coe.montana.edu!ogicse!das-news.harvard.edu!husc-news.harvard.edu!zariski!zeleny Wed Feb 26 12:53:24 EST 1992
Article 3909 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!ames!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!usc!rpi!usenet.coe.montana.edu!ogicse!das-news.harvard.edu!husc-news.harvard.edu!zariski!zeleny
>From: zeleny@zariski.harvard.edu (Mikhail Zeleny)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Definition of understanding
Message-ID: <1992Feb21.012616.9016@husc3.harvard.edu>
Date: 21 Feb 92 06:26:14 GMT
References: <1992Feb19.013515.26133@mp.cs.niu.edu> <1992Feb19.172251.7320@psych.toronto.edu> <43686@dime.cs.umass.edu>
Organization: Dept. of Math, Harvard Univ.
Lines: 39
Nntp-Posting-Host: zariski.harvard.edu

In article <43686@dime.cs.umass.edu> 
orourke@sophia.smith.edu (Joseph O'Rourke) writes:

>In article <1992Feb19.172251.7320@psych.toronto.edu> 
>christo@psych.toronto.edu (Christopher Green) writes:

CG:
>>[re Chinese room]
>>The systems response [is] one of the more intelligent ones, 
>>although Searle replied to it in 1980 in BBS, and again in 1991 in 
>>_Scientific American_. So far, I've never heard a good counter-reply.

JOR:
>Douglas Hofstadter provides a counter-reply in "The Minds I."
>Dennett says in "Consciousness Explained" that Searle has never
>refuted Hofstadter's counter-reply.  So whether there has never been
>a "good counter-reply" is a matter of opinion.

A matter of opinion indeed.  My considered opinion of Dennett is that he
has been intellectually bankrupt for quite some time now; consequently, I
place little stock in his opinion of Searle's argument, especially given
that he certainly has failed to refute it in the aforementioned tome.
However, philosophical arguments have a peculiar property of standing or
falling on their own, regardless of the actions of their originators.  So
perhaps you could oblige me by summarizing Hofstadter's counter-reply for
my own consideration.


`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'
: Qu'est-ce qui est bien?  Qu'est-ce qui est laid?         Harvard   :
: Qu'est-ce qui est grand, fort, faible...                 doesn't   :
: Connais pas! Connais pas!                                 think    :
:                                                             so     :
: Mikhail Zeleny                                                     :
: 872 Massachusetts Ave., Apt. 707                                   :
: Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139           (617) 661-8151            :
: email zeleny@zariski.harvard.edu or zeleny@HUMA1.BITNET            :
:                                                                    :
'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`


