From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!ccu.umanitoba.ca!access.usask.ca!kakwa.ucs.ualberta.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!ubc-cs!uw-beaver!micro-heart-of-gold.mit.edu!news.bbn.com!usc!wupost!think.com! Wed Feb 26 12:54:42 EST 1992
Article 4028 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!ccu.umanitoba.ca!access.usask.ca!kakwa.ucs.ualberta.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!ubc-cs!uw-beaver!micro-heart-of-gold.mit.edu!news.bbn.com!usc!wupost!think.com!
zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!ames!ncar!noao!amethyst!organpipe.uug.arizona.edu!NSMA.AriZonA.EdU!bill
>From: bill@NSMA.AriZonA.EdU (Bill Skaggs)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Definition of understanding
Message-ID: <1992Feb26.022152.254@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu>
Date: 26 Feb 92 02:21:52 GMT
References: <1992Feb25.175012.8924@oracorp.com>
Sender: news@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu
Reply-To: bill@NSMA.AriZonA.EdU (Bill Skaggs)
Organization: Center for Neural Systems, Memory, and Aging
Lines: 18

In article <1992Feb25.175012.8924@oracorp.com> daryl@oracorp.com writes:
>
>Although I agree with Hofstadter that Searle's arguments are wrong, I
>also agree with you that Hofstadter's reply is worthless (if you have
>characterized it accurately). [ . . . ]

  Daryl,
	Most of what you write is very perceptive and cogent,
and very well written, but I am seriously disappointed by this
one.  Hofstadter's reply was *not* accurately characterized, and
you shouldn't criticize what you haven't read.  Hofstadter's
reply comes directly after the reprint of Searle's "Minds,
Brains, and Programs" in "The Mind's I", which is edited by
Hofstadter and Dennett.

	-- Bill

(sorry, I can't get Email to your address.)


