David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Searle’s discussions over the years 1980-2004 of the implications of his “Chinese Room” Gedanken experiment are frustrating because they proceed from a correct assertion: “Instantiating a computer program is never by itself a sufficient condition of intentionality;” and an incorrect assertion: “The explanation of how the brain produces intentionality cannot be that it does it by instantiating a computer program.” In this article, I describe how to construct a Gedanken zombie Chinese Room program that will pass the Turing test and at the same time unambiguously demonstrates the correctness of. I then describe how to construct a Gedanken Chinese brain program that will pass the Turing test, has a mind, and understands Chinese, thus demonstrating that is incorrect. Searle’s instantiation of this program can and does produce intentionality. Searle’s longstanding ignorance of Chinese is simply irrelevant and always has been. I propose a truce and a plan for further exploration
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library||
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Koji Tanaka (2004). Minds, Programs, and Chinese Philosophers: A Chinese Perspective on the Chinese Room. Sophia 43 (1):61-72.
Herbert A. Simon & Stuart A. Eisenstadt (2003). A Chinese Room That Understands. In John M. Preston & Michael A. Bishop (eds.), Views Into the Chinese Room: New Essays on Searle and Artificial Intelligence. Oxford University Press
Robert French (1996). The Inverted Turing Test: How a Mindless Program Could Pass It. Psycoloquy 7 (39).
Richard Sharvy (1983). I. It Ain't the Meat, It's the Motion. Inquiry 26 (1):125 – 131.
Stevan Harnad (1989). Minds, Machines and Searle. Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Artificial Intelligence 1 (4):5-25.
Mark Sprevak (2007). Chinese Rooms and Program Portability. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 58 (4):755 - 776.
Steffen Borge (2007). A Modal Defence of Strong AI. In Dermot Moran Stephen Voss (ed.), The Proceedings of the Twenty-First World Congress of Philosophy. The Philosophical Society of Turkey 127-131.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads103 ( #38,657 of 1,907,057 )
Recent downloads (6 months)14 ( #45,634 of 1,907,057 )
How can I increase my downloads?