[Wittrs] Re: Who beat Kasparov?

  • From: Gordon Swobe <gts_2000@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 06:39:11 -0700 (PDT)

Yes, Searle introduced the idea of "as-if" intentionality but he did not 
introduce the idea of intentionality itself. As-if intentionality seems an easy 
enough concept to grasp. 

Kasparov has intrinsic (as opposed to as-if) intentionality: he has a conscious 
mind that contains contents about the state of affairs on the chess board, and 
about his chess strategy. 

Deep Blue has only as-if intentionality: although we might say there exists a 
sense in which Deep Blue "thinks about chess strategy", we cannot say Deep Blue 
has conscious mental contents. Deep Blue has no subjective life whatsoever. It 
acts *as if* it has intentionality when fact it does not have it. Agree so far?

Dennett gets it wrong I believe when he in effect denies Kasparov's intrinsic 
intentionality. On his view, as I understand it, he takes what he calls "the 
intentional stance" toward both Kasparov and Deep Blue. He implies, wrongly, 
that Kasparov has nothing that Deep Blue does not have.

-gts




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

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

Other related posts: