COMMENT ⊗   VALID 00002 PAGES
C REC  PAGE   DESCRIPTION
C00001 00001
C00002 00002		In trying to refute the "Berkeley answer", John Searle
C00004 ENDMK
C⊗;
	In trying to refute the "Berkeley answer", John Searle
imagines a man carrying out in his head a program for conducting
a dialog in Chinese and notes that the man carrying out the
program might understand no Chinese.  He concludes from this
that understanding is not a property of programs.

	Here two processes are using the same hardware.  It is like
Stevenson's %2Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde%1 except that Dr. Jekyll is
interpreting Mr. Hyde rather than time-sharing with him.  Were either
phenomenon common, we would not identify a human personality with the
human body just as we don't identify a computer program with the computer
itself.  Once we distinguish the two processes taking place in the same
brain, the Berkeley answer that the interpreted process understands
Chinese remains tenable.