What the preceding arguments show — I take it — is that none of the four traditional marks of the mental considered provide a supportable basis for denying that Cal calculates in the same sense as you or I; i.e., I have sought to show that our initial syllogism does not commit the fallacy of four terms by equivocating on calculates, its middle. I will conclude by remarking why the argument — at least as I intend it, and on its least tendentious reading — doesn''t equivocate on its major, thinks, either. Ordinarily think is a generic term for any of several different mental activities or states. According to Descartes, a thing that thinks is a thing which doubts, understands, affirms, denies, is willing, is unwilling, and also imagines and has sensory perceptions (1642: 19). Similarly, my dictionary (Webster''s New Collegiate), under think, mentions conceive, judge, consider, surmise, expect, determine, resolve, reason, intend, purpose, reflect, infer, opine, and decide. In this ordinary generic sense of the term, I take it, it''s undeniable that calculating is thinking, and — if my arguments are sound — that my pocket calculator calculates and consequently thinks.