From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!sdd.hp.com!wupost!uunet!mcsun!uknet!edcastle!aiai!jeff Mon Mar  9 18:33:54 EST 1992
Article 4142 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!sdd.hp.com!wupost!uunet!mcsun!uknet!edcastle!aiai!jeff
>From: jeff@aiai.ed.ac.uk (Jeff Dalton)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Definition of understanding
Message-ID: <6304@skye.ed.ac.uk>
Date: 28 Feb 92 19:50:43 GMT
References: <1992Feb25.011840.24663@beaver.cs.washington.edu> <1992Feb25.184610.5199@psych.toronto.edu> <1992Feb26.021000.29992@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu>
Sender: news@aiai.ed.ac.uk
Organization: AIAI, University of Edinburgh, Scotland
Lines: 21

In article <1992Feb26.021000.29992@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu> bill@NSMA.AriZonA.EdU (Bill Skaggs) writes:

>  There is a kind of psychological disorder called
>Multiple Personality Syndrome, 

And you think being in the Chinese Room would induce this?
(Fortunately, in this case, it can be cured just by shutting 
the rule books.)

>  When the man in Searle's experiment (who has internalized
>the Chinese room) is asked whether he speaks Chinese, he
>says he does not.  Could it be that he is simply, in the
>same sense as Hyde, wrong?

No.  

>(P.S. My own view is that it makes perfect sense to think
>of two minds running around inside the man's head.)

Which wouldn't mean that _he_ understood Chinese.  Instead,
it's this virtual person who would understand Chinese.


