[Wittrs] Re: Reading the Third Axiom without the Equivocation
- From: Gordon Swobe <gts_2000@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 23 May 2010 11:35:09 -0700 (PDT)
--- On Sat, 5/22/10, SWM <wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> So the CRA, which argues that computers can't do
> consciousness because they are only syntax in action and
> syntax can't make the stuff of consciousness, is replaced by
> an argument that computers can't even do syntax! Thus it's
> not that syntax can't do understanding but that computers
> can't do syntax. Curiouser and curiouser! And even more of a
> reach!
No, Searle's APA address argument does not "replace" his CRA. It augments it.
With his CRA he exposed the strong AI thesis as at least false. His APA
argument shows it as incoherent, not even rising to the level falsehood.
(Sorry I've been away for a few weeks. I have ~250 unread messages from this
list in my mailbox...)
-gts
==========================================
Need Something? Check here: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/
Other related posts:
