A Fair Version of the Chinese Room

Problemos 96 (2019)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

By the Chinese room thought experiment, John Searle advocates the thesis that it is impossible for computers to think in the same way that human beings do. This article intends firstly to show that the Chinese room does not justify or even test this thesis and secondly to describe exactly how the person in the Chinese room can learn Chinese. Regarding this learning process, Searle ignores the relevance of an individual’s pattern recognition capacity for understanding. To counter Searle’s claim, this paper, via examining a series of thought experiments inspired by the Chinese room, aims to underline the importance of pattern recognition for understanding to emerge.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,752

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

A note on the chinese room.Hanoch Ben-Yami - 1993 - Synthese 95 (2):169-72.
The chinese room is a trick.Peter Kugel - 2004 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (1):153-154.
Helen Keller Was Never in a Chinese Room.Jason Ford - 2011 - Minds and Machines 21 (1):57-72.
The chinese room argument: Consciousness and understanding.Simone Gozzano - 1997 - In Matjaz Gams, M. Paprzycki & X. Wu (eds.), Mind Versus Computer: Were Dreyfus and Winograd Right? Amsterdam: IOS Press. pp. 43--231.
Nixin' goes to china.Larry Hauser - 2003 - In John M. Preston & John Mark Bishop (eds.), Views Into the Chinese Room: New Essays on Searle and Artificial Intelligence. Oxford University Press. pp. 123--143.

Analytics

Added to PP
2019-10-17

Downloads
5 (#1,536,375)

6 months
1 (#1,464,097)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references