[Wittrs] Re: Searle's CRA and its Implications

  • From: "BruceD" <blroadies@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2010 19:28:12 -0000

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

> The CRA illustrates two concepts:

> 1) Software/hardware systems cannot by virtue of
> running formal programs obtain understanding of the meanings
> of the symbols they manipulate.

Right! The programs aren't, in themselves, a person. Only people understand.

> 2) Given that the human brain/mind does
> understand the meanings of the symbols it manipulates,
> it must do something other than or
> in addition to the running of formal programs.

Is this consistent with your viewpoint?

Yes, what the brain/mind does in addition is reflect upon what it does when the 
brain/mind is utilized by the person (not necessarily consciously) to do so.

By saying this I'm not adding another something, a spirit, to the mix. 
Reflection, understanding,requires brain changes that can be visualized on a 
fMRI. These brain changes can be called "computing" but not in the sense in 
which my computer computes.


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

Other related posts: