Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On 20/02/2008, Richard Loosemore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I am aware of some of those other sources for the idea: nevertheless,
they are all nonsense for the same reason. I especially single out
Searle: his writings on this subject are virtually worthless. I have
argued with Searle to his face, and I have talked with others
(Hofstadter, for example) who have also done so, and the consensus among
these people is that his arguments are built on confusion.
Just to be clear, this is *not* the same as Searle's Chinese Room
argument, which only he seems to find convincing.
Oh, my word: if only it was just him!
He was at the Tucson Consciousness conference two years ago, and in his
big talk he strutted about the stage saying "I invented the Chinese Room
thought experiment, and the Computationalists tried to explain it away
for twenty years until finally the dust settled, and now finally they
have given up and everyone agrees that I WON!"
This statement was followed by tumultuous applause and cheers from a
large fraction of the 800+ audience.
You're right that it is not the same as the Chinese Room, but if I am
not mistaken this was one of his attempts to demolish a reply to the
Chinese Room.
Richard Loosemore
-------------------------------------------
singularity
Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/11983/=now
RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/11983/
Modify Your Subscription:
http://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=4007604&id_secret=96140713-a54b2b
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
