The systems reply replies: “‘the man as a formal symbol manipulation system’ really does understand Chinese.” (Searle 240) In this reply, the systems reply begs the question, that is, it insists the truth of its claims without argumentation in addition to its original argument. So, the systems reply is false.

What is main claim of John Searle’s Chinese room argument?

The Chinese room argument holds that a digital computer executing a program cannot have a “mind”, “understanding” or “consciousness”, regardless of how intelligently or human-like the program may make the computer behave.

Why is the Chinese room argument flawed?

Even if a hardware running a program creates a mind that understands Chinese, the person in the Chinese Room is the hardware and doesn’t understand Chinese. It does not, however, refute the possibility that the hardware can create a mind that understands Chinese by executing the program.

What’s wrong and right about Searle’s Chinese room argument?

Searle’s Chinese Room Argument showed a fatal flaw in computationalism (the idea that mental states are just computational states) and helped usher in the era of situated robotics and symbol grounding (although Searle himself thought neuroscience was the only correct way to understand the mind).

What is the main point of Searle’s Chinese Room argument quizlet?

Terms in this set (8)

What is the Chinese Room Argument? That computer programs properly constructed can produce sophisticated linguistic output indistinguishable from a human. Therefore, the turing test will be passed by a computer. But, the programmed computer still cannot understand anything.

What is the system reply to Searle’s argument?

Searle’s response to the Systems Reply is simple: in principle, he could internalize the entire system, memorizing all the instructions and the database, and doing all the calculations in his head. He could then leave the room and wander outdoors, perhaps even conversing in Chinese.

What is the systems reply to the Chinese Room thought experiment?

The systems reply replies: “‘the man as a formal symbol manipulation system‘ really does understand Chinese.” (Searle 240) In this reply, the systems reply begs the question, that is, it insists the truth of its claims without argumentation in addition to its original argument.

How does Searle respond to the robot reply quizlet?

Which of the following best characterizes Searle’s response to the Robot Reply? Putting the program into a robot concedes that merely running a program is not sufficient for understanding.

What does Searle think his Chinese room thought experiment shows quizlet?

Terms in this set (13) Searle is inside a room that shows a screen with inputs written in Chinese, but he does not know Chinese, so they look like meaningless squiggles. There is an output chute where he can put the correct output according to an English rulebook that tells you how to manipulate the symbols.

What is John Searle’s view about strong AI quizlet?

Terms in this set (14)

Searle argues against The Strong A.I. Thesis: An appropriately programmed computer would be a thinking thing (a mind). John Searle is locked in a room, he does NOT know or understand any Chinese.

What does Searle think his Chinese room thought experiment shows?

In his so-called “Chinese-room argument,” Searle attempted to show that there is more to thinking than this kind of rule-governed manipulation of symbols. The argument involves a situation in which a person who does not understand Chinese is locked in a room.

What is the Chinese room experiment in AI?

The Chinese room argument is a thought experiment of John Searle. It is one of the best known and widely credited counters to claims of artificial intelligence (AI), that is, to claims that computers do or at least can (or someday might) think.

Which authors defended versions of the cosmological argument?

According to your text, which two authors defended versions of the cosmological argument? Thomas Aquinas and Richard Taylor.

What is the conclusion of the cause and effect argument for God’s existence?

What is the conclusion of the cause and effect argument for God’s existence? The universe has a cause. What does the scientific Law of Causality state? Something cannot come from nothing.

Why is the cosmological argument important?

The cosmological argument is part of classical natural theology, whose goal is to provide evidence for the claim that God exists. On the one hand, the argument arises from human curiosity as to why there is something rather than nothing or than something else.

Adblock
detector