On 12/2/06, Mark Waser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
A nice story but it proves absolutely nothing . . . . .
It proves to me that there is no point in continuing this debate.
Further, and more importantly, the pattern matcher *doesn't* understand it's results either and certainly could build upon them -- thus, it *fails* the test as far as being the central component of an RSIAI or being able to provide evidence as to the required behavior of such.
This sounds very Searlian. The only "test" you seem to be referring to is the Chinese Room test. ----- This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to: http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=303
