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

  • From: "SWM" <SWMirsky@xxxxxxx>
  • To: wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2010 02:37:54 -0000

--- In Wittrs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Gordon Swobe <wittrsamr@...> wrote:

> --- On Mon, 3/29/10, SWM <wittrsamr@...> wrote:
> > But, for the record, Gordon is mistaken below when he denies the
> > description of the CR's activities as "rote responses".

> Again, you fail to understand, or perhaps you just don't know, that in 
> Searle's actual published Chinese Room Argument the man comes to understand 
> the English version of the stories but not the Chinese version of the stories 
> while performing exactly the same sort of "rote responses" (as you call them) 
> in both cases.
> If the man truly has no bigger role in the experiment than you give him 
> credit for; that is, if he plays only the role of a cog in the machinery 
> implementing so-called rote processes, then he would fail to understand the 
> English version of the stories.
> -gts

He isn't doing the same thing in both cases. In one he is reading the material 
while in the other he is following rules for matching symbols. The point is to 
ask what it means to read and understand vs. reading for the purpose of symbol 
matching. -- SWM

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

Other related posts: