Carleton misreads Searle

Carleton misread Searle, saying that brain processes or something as powerful as them must produce intentionality. But all Searle's saying is if something's intentional it must have been produced by a brain or something as powerful as a brain.

Dale Jacquette, 1989

Note: Jacquette also thinks that Searle's right causal powers argument is faulty (see "The brains causal powers can be reproduced by a computational system", Box 73) but he doesn't think that Carleton makes a good case against Searle.
RELATED ARTICLESExplain
Artificial Intelligence
Can computers think? [1]
Yes: physical symbol systems can think [3]
The Chinese Room Argument [4]
Understanding arises from right causal powers
Searle commits fallacy of denying the antecedent
Carleton misreads Searle
Graph of this discussion
Enter the title of your article


Enter a short (max 500 characters) summation of your article
Enter the main body of your article
Lock
+Comments (0)
+Citations (0)
+About
Enter comment

Select article text to quote
welcome text

First name   Last name 

Email

Skip