From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!psych.toronto.edu!michael Tue Apr  7 23:24:31 EDT 1992
Article 4960 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!psych.toronto.edu!michael
>From: michael@psych.toronto.edu (Michael Gemar)
Subject: Re: The Chinese Room (or Number Five's Alive)
Organization: Department of Psychology, University of Toronto
References: <6737@pkmab.se> <1992Apr5.210553.11966@psych.toronto.edu> <1992Apr06.164725.3908@spss.com>
Message-ID: <1992Apr7.203725.1344@psych.toronto.edu>
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 20:37:25 GMT

In article <1992Apr06.164725.3908@spss.com> markrose@spss.com (Mark Rosenfelder) writes:
>In article <1992Apr5.210553.11966@psych.toronto.edu> christo@psych.toronto.edu (Christopher Green) writes:
>>In article <6737@pkmab.se> ske@pkmab.se (Kristoffer Eriksson) writes:
>>>
>>>Surely, no-one has suggested that SHRDLU is advanced enough to have a mind?
>>>
>>Under strong AI, one would be committed to such a view. 
>
>This is an absurd claim.  Strong AI claims that minds can be created by
>implementing an appropriate program.  It does not claim that minds are
>created by implementing *any* program.  (Maybe some people think that,
>but it is not a consequence of Strong AI.)

What counts as an "appropriate" program?  And does this mean you are willing to
jettison the Turing Test, since it makes no stipulation as to the 
type of program implemented?

- michael



