<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div><div>On Dec 12, 2009, Gordon Swobe wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; font-family: Verdana; font-size: medium; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; ">Perhps you missed it Damien it but that reply of the systems critics was answered many years ago.<br>In the reply, the man internalizes the rule book and steps outside the room.<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span></blockquote><br></div><div>You are assuming the little man has qualities that are clearly superhuman, but when you ask "do you know Chinese?" we are supposed to believe that the person answering the question is just a regular normal person. So either there are 2 personalities in the little man, a superman and a normal man, or the little man is lying about his language abilities, or the entire thought experiment is dumb.</div><div><br></div><div>And I still think Searle's philosophical work would improve enormously if he took a remedial adult education biology course, there must be a junior college near him that offers it.</div><div><br></div><div> John K Clark</div></body></html>