[Wittrs] Re: Searle's CRA shows nothing
- From: "jrstern" <jrstern@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 17:11:30 -0000
--- In Wittrs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "iro3isdx" <xznwrjnk-evca@...> wrote:
>
> As I read through this thread, I get the impression that some
> people do not understand the systems reply. Incidently, it was my
> impression from what Searle writes, that he does not understand the
> systems reply either - he seems to see it as an attempt at a sneaky
> end run around his argument.
Well, he denies its validity - for computers.
It contradicts a lot of his anthropocentric preferences, or at least he thinks
it does. I'm not so certain. After all, Searle *does* assert a physicalist
basis, which is a sort of a "systems" basis, he just somehow knows and asserts
that digital electronic computers are not the *right* physical basis.
Josh
=========================================
Need Something? Check here: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/
Other related posts:
