[Wittrs] Re: Further Thoughts on Dennett, Searle and the Conundrum of Dualism

  • From: Gordon Swobe <gts_2000@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 13:24:46 -0700 (PDT)

The idea of "rote responses" comes from your imagination.

The man has *full cognitive capacity* while he implements the syntactic 
program(s). He uses his full capacities in an attempt to understand the symbols 
both in English and in Chinese. 

He succeeds in English, (proving beyond any doubt that he does not exist merely 
as a cog in the machinery implementing rote responses, as in your bogus 
theory). 

But he fails to understand the symbols in Chinese.

Conclusion: If one wants to understand Chinese, one must do something besides 
manipulate Chinese symbols according to rules of syntax. In other words, syntax 
by itself is neither constitutive of nor sufficient for semantics. A3=true. End 
of thought experiment.


-gts



      
==========================================

Need Something? Check here: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/

Other related posts: