> the conclusion to take from the "Chinese room" We can hem and haw about whether or not there are others, but the particular conclusion I am drawing from is t

> the conclusion to take from the "Chinese room" We can hem and haw about whether or not there are others, but the particular conclusion I am drawing from is that computers lack "intentionality" regarding language, and indeed about anything at all. Symbol shunting, pencil pushing, and the mechanics of syntax are insufficient for the production of meaning and understanding. That is, to oversimplify, the broad distinction drawn in Naur's article regarding the "programming as text manipulation" view vis-a-vis "programming as theory building." > That's very much unclear at this point. It's certainly a central point of contention.