From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!tdatirv!sarima Thu Dec 26 23:57:40 EST 1991
Article 2324 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!tdatirv!sarima
>From: sarima@tdatirv.UUCP (Stanley Friesen)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Searle's response to silicon brain?
Message-ID: <348@tdatirv.UUCP>
Date: 19 Dec 91 19:58:23 GMT
References: <40822@dime.cs.umass.edu> <1991Dec18.172040.3506@spss.com>
Reply-To: sarima@tdatirv.UUCP (Stanley Friesen)
Organization: Teradata Corp., Irvine
Lines: 16

In article <1991Dec18.172040.3506@spss.com> markrose@spss.com (Mark Rosenfelder) writes:
|
|Searle believes that understanding and other mental phenomena have some
|*physical* basis, tied to their actual implementation in the brain, which
|computers cannot reproduce, although they could simulate them.

O.K. He believes that.  Now, what evidence can he show me to demonstrate
that he is right?  A syllogism is *not* evidence, it is argument.


[P.S.  I will be unavailable for a while, so any actual research references
should be mailed, not posted;; see you all after Xmas].
-- 
---------------
uunet!tdatirv!sarima				(Stanley Friesen)



