Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Yes, She Was! Reply to Ford’s “Helen KellerWas Never in a Chinese Room”.William Rapaport - 2011 - Minds and Machines 21 (1):3-17.
    Ford’s Helen Keller Was Never in a Chinese Room claims that my argument in How Helen Keller Used Syntactic Semantics to Escape from a Chinese Room fails because Searle and I use the terms ‘syntax’ and ‘semantics’ differently, hence are at cross purposes. Ford has misunderstood me; this reply clarifies my theory.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Computers Are Syntax All the Way Down: Reply to Bozşahin.William J. Rapaport - forthcoming - Minds and Machines:1-11.
    A response to a recent critique by Cem Bozşahin of the theory of syntactic semantics as it applies to Helen Keller, and some applications of the theory to the philosophy of computer science.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Helen Keller Was Never in a Chinese Room.Jason Ford - 2011 - Minds and Machines 21 (1):57-72.
    William Rapaport, in “How Helen Keller used syntactic semantics to escape from a Chinese Room,” (Rapaport 2006), argues that Helen Keller was in a sort of Chinese Room, and that her subsequent development of natural language fluency illustrates the flaws in Searle’s famous Chinese Room Argument and provides a method for developing computers that have genuine semantics (and intentionality). I contend that his argument fails. In setting the problem, Rapaport uses his own preferred definitions of semantics and syntax, but he (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations