From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!garrot.DMI.USherb.CA!uxa.ecn.bgu.edu!mp.cs.niu.edu!rickert Thu Apr 16 11:33:33 EDT 1992
Article 4999 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!garrot.DMI.USherb.CA!uxa.ecn.bgu.edu!mp.cs.niu.edu!rickert
>From: rickert@mp.cs.niu.edu (Neil Rickert)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: syntax and semantics
Message-ID: <1992Apr9.005331.23376@mp.cs.niu.edu>
Date: 9 Apr 92 00:53:31 GMT
References: <92099.165657JPE1@psuvm.psu.edu> <1992Apr8.220700.12092@mp.cs.niu.edu> <92099.200726JPE1@psuvm.psu.edu>
Organization: Northern Illinois University
Lines: 30

In article <92099.200726JPE1@psuvm.psu.edu> <JPE1@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
>In article <1992Apr8.220700.12092@mp.cs.niu.edu>, rickert@mp.cs.niu.edu (Neil
>Rickert) says:
>>In article <92099.165657JPE1@psuvm.psu.edu> JPE1@psuvm.psu.edu writes:
>>>   Does this mean that you reject the isomorphism that many philosophers
>>>find between computers and formal systems?  And if so, on what grounds?
>>
>>  I certainly do when it is doing numeric computations involving approximate
>>arithmetic (as is done, for example, in the floating point unit).  To treat
>>the computer in such a case as doing formal symbol manipulations is to reduce
>>its task to something incredibly intricate and resource consuming, but
>>without any purpose.
>
>     The purpose is to distinguish between what the computer is actually
>doing (i.e. what is actually happening inside the computer) and what kinds
>of things _we_ do with the various states (say, output) of the computer
>(i.e. how we interpret them).

 Certainly you may, if you wish, say that what the computer "is actually
doing" is formal manipulations, and anything else is an interpretation.  But
then you must surely say that what you are actually doing is chemical
manipulations, and anything else is an interpretation.  Any use of this
approach to deny the possibility that computers could ever have semantics
applies equally to deny the possibility that humans could have semantics.

-- 
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
  Neil W. Rickert, Computer Science               <rickert@cs.niu.edu>
  Northern Illinois Univ.
  DeKalb, IL 60115                                   +1-815-753-6940


