From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!bronze!chalmers Sun Dec  1 13:06:13 EST 1991
Article 1707 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!bronze!chalmers
>From: chalmers@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (David Chalmers)
Subject: Re: Dennett on Edelman--what a total loss
Message-ID: <1991Nov28.051621.24327@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu>
Organization: Indiana University
References: <57569@netnews.upenn.edu> <1991Nov27.031545.11235@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu> <5734@skye.ed.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 91 05:16:21 GMT
Lines: 17

In article <5734@skye.ed.ac.uk> jeff@aiai.UUCP (Jeff Dalton) writes:

>In article <1991Nov27.031545.11235@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu> chalmers@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (David Chalmers) writes:
>>He comes close to saddling AI researchers with the ridiculously strong
>>claim that "the brain is a Turing machine" (a claim that I note has
>>been bandied about a number of times in this newsgroup, almost always
>>by anti-AI proponents looking for straw figures). 
>
>Really, I thought they were arguing that artificial intelligences
>on computers (_not_ brains) were FSAs (_not_ Turing Machines).

The quantifier was existential, not universal.

-- 
Dave Chalmers                            (dave@cogsci.indiana.edu)      
Center for Research on Concepts and Cognition, Indiana University.
"It is not the least charm of a theory that it is refutable."


