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.
Immediately related elementsHow this works
-
Artificial Intelligence »Artificial Intelligence
▲
Can computers think? [1] »Can computers think? [1]
▲
Yes: physical symbol systems can think [3] »Yes: physical symbol systems can think [3]
▲
The Chinese Room Argument [4] »The Chinese Room Argument [4]
▲
Understanding arises from right causal powers »Understanding arises from right causal powers
▲
Searle commits fallacy of denying the antecedent »Searle commits fallacy of denying the antecedent
■
Carleton misreads Searle
+Komentarai (0)
+Citavimą (0)
+About