From: Robin Lee Powell (email@example.com)
Date: Thu Jan 19 2006 - 14:10:05 MST
On Thu, Jan 19, 2006 at 03:34:02PM -0500, Woody Long wrote:
> > [Original Message]
> > From: Richard Loosemore <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> > To: <email@example.com>
> > I will try to explain why I say this, and address the points you make.
> > First, it is difficult to argue about what *exactly* Searle was claiming
> > in his original paper, because in an important sense there was no such
> > thing as "exactly what he said" -- he used vague language and subtle
> > innuendos at certain crucial points of the argument, so if you try to
> > pin down the fine print you find that it all starts to get very slippery.
> Well there IS an *exactly* with all else being externally added, such as
> UTM and the mind-on-top-of-mind.
> Here it is clearly, in Searle's words, in his 1999 Institute of
> International Studies, UC Berkeley "Conversations With History" Interview
Good fucking god.
Searle's an asshat who apparently believes that because our neurons
don't understand Chinese, we're not concious. Can we *please* stop
talking about him?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:55 MDT