Quote:
Originally Posted by jeff_wilson
already done them, next please
|
Just a moment, I think I see part of the disconnect:
"Searle then supposes that he is in a closed room and has a book with an English version of the computer program...However, Searle would not be able to understand the conversation. ("I don't speak a word of Chinese,"[9] he points out.) Therefore, he argues, it follows that the computer would not be able to understand the conversation either."
In this he is considering himself a clerk as distinct from the program book contents and from the office supplies he uses in the course of activity. If he does not retain any of the knowledge recorded in the book, he is considering only the hardware's counterpart. Of course the clerk does not speak Chinese, just as an unloaded computer does not speak Chinese, or prepare taxes, or play games! As I said earlier, he is considering a part in isolation. With a different book, he could complete other tasks without knowing how to do them, similar to how rowers can propel a ship to a distant port without knowing where it is because the direction is supplied by the helmsman.
And the Greek for helmsman is "kybernetes".