From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!jupiter!morgan.ucs.mun.ca!nstn.ns.ca!aunro!ukma!wupost!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!batcomputer!cornell!rochester!yamauchi Tue Nov 26 12:32:40 EST 1991
Article 1610 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Xref: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca rec.arts.books:10677 sci.philosophy.tech:1131 comp.ai.philosophy:1610
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!jupiter!morgan.ucs.mun.ca!nstn.ns.ca!aunro!ukma!wupost!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!batcomputer!cornell!rochester!yamauchi
>From: yamauchi@cs.rochester.edu (Brian Yamauchi)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books,sci.philosophy.tech,comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Searle (was Re: Daniel Dennett (was Re: Comme
Message-ID: <YAMAUCHI.91Nov25203631@indigo.cs.rochester.edu>
Date: 26 Nov 91 03:36:31 GMT
References: <1991Nov14.223348.4076@milton.u.washington.edu>
	<MATT.91Nov24000158@physics.berkeley.edu>
	<1991Nov24.195230.5843@husc3.harvard.edu>
	<JMC.91Nov24194704@SAIL.Stanford.EDU> <5689@skye.ed.ac.uk>
Sender: yamauchi@cs.rochester.edu (Brian Yamauchi)
Followup-To: sci.philosophy.tech,comp.ai.philosophy
Organization: University of Rochester
Lines: 41
In-Reply-To: jeff@aiai.ed.ac.uk's message of 25 Nov 91 19:24:11 GMT
Nntp-Posting-Host: indigo.cs.rochester.edu


(Note that rec.arts.books has been removed from followups.)

In article <5689@skye.ed.ac.uk> jeff@aiai.ed.ac.uk (Jeff Dalton) writes:
>In article <JMC.91Nov24194704@SAIL.Stanford.EDU> jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU writes:
>>Let's start out simple.  The reading of a digital thermometer
>>"stands for" the temperature.

>Because we so interpret it.  The number 32 also stands for a
>temperature, if we want it to.  It might be argued that there's
>a direct causal connection between the thermometer and the
>temperature.  But so what?  If there's a causal connection
>between the word "temperature" and physical temperature (so
>to speak) that makes the word stand for the phenomenon, it's
>surely not the same causal connection as that between the
>reading of a thermometer and the same phenomenon.

Could you (or anyone else on the anti-AI side) explain what you mean
by a "causal connection" (or Searle's even-more-mystical term "causal
powers")?  The "causal connection" between temperature and a
thermometer is clear, change the temperature and the reading on the
thermometer also changes.  What does it mean to say that a word "makes
the word stand for the phenomenon"?

Humans use the word temperature to represent an environmental state
variable that corresponds to direct sensory perception of heat as well
as perception of the results of heat (low heat: water freezing, high
heat: water boiling, etc.).  Now, a robot could similarly detect this
phenomenon (directly through thermometers, indirectly through vision
and other forms of sensing) and could be programmed to adapt its
behavior appropriately (e.g. if it's hot, move slowly to avoid
overheating motors).  So the robot is "interpreting" the reading of
its thermometers -- unless you assume, a priori, that machines are
inherently incapable of "interpreting" anything -- in which case, this
boils down to an argument over theology...
--
_______________________________________________________________________________

Brian Yamauchi				NASA/Caltech Jet Propulsion Laboratory
yamauchi@cs.rochester.edu		Robotic Intelligence Group
_______________________________________________________________________________


