I m not sure that you re correct that nearly all computer scientists agree with Strong AI If you saw a machine pass a Turing test and then someone turned to you and asked if you thought it had mind with consciousness just like ours would you agree right away I think most thoughtful people would say either 1 I d need to know something about the program before I ll agree that it s conscious I e the Turing test is an insufficient measure of consciousness or 2 Who cares if it s conscious It s unbelievably impressive I e consciousness and mind are either meaningless or irrelevant I don t think most computer scientists claim you can use a Turing test to uncover a mind However all of them agree and Searle as well that you can use AI technology to solve problems I don t think computer scientists spend a whole lot of time thinking about minds in any case Which is Harnad s point Searle should have attacked Hillary Putnam and Jerry Fodor directly rather than picking on innocent computer scientists like Roger Schank who never claimed his programs actually understood or had minds in the first place