John K Clark (
Fri, 6 Feb 1998 09:55:09 -0800 (PST)


On Fri, 6 Feb 1998 Brent Allsop <> Wrote:

>one thing is very obvious, red which we use to represent 700 nm
>light, and by the way is nothing like 700 nm light since it is in our

True, and equally true is the fact that the data in a computer's memory that
a photo cell has received a photon of 700 nm light is nothing like that light.
I don't know if that data is anything like my idea of red, and I don't know
if your red is the same as mine either.

>is certainly a lot more (and much more rich in meaning resulting in
>our greater intelligence) than some mere non unified abstract set of

All bits are abstract whether in a brain or a machine, and if computers
contained nothing but non unified set of bits they would produce only
gibberish. They don't.

>where it doesn't matter if these bits are represent by a man in a
>room reading kanji, holes in paper, or quantim bits in a quantum

To exist information must be in a context, otherwise a hole in a paper tape
is not data it's just a hole, but there is nothing unique about the human
mind in that regard.

As for Searle's Chinese Room, it only proves one thing, a very small part of
a mechanism does not have all the attributes of the whole.

John K Clark

Version: 2.6.i