Frank:

Your assertion is that it is the brain (and only the brain) that crosses the bridge between transmission (of the chemical and electronic sort) and understanding.

In making this assertion you are endowing a biochemical complex with the attribute of understanding.

When I say this is _comparable_ to asserting that a cellphone understands, I am saying that there is _a_ similarity--that of attributing understanding to an electronic and chemical device.

In disputing this similarity by asserting that the brain can too understand you simply repeat the orginal assertion/assumption in a circular fashion.

My claim is that there is a qualitative difference between mechanics--even complex mechanics such as those of our wetware--and understanding, a leap from one whole kind of phenomenon to another.

A