“Could a machine think?” asks John R. Searle in his paper Minds, Brains, and Programs. He answers that “only a machine could think1, and only very special kinds of machines, namely brains.”2 The subject of this paper is the analysis of the aforementioned question through presentation of the symbol manipulation approach to intelligence and Searle's well-known criticism to this approach, namely the Chinese room argument. The examination of these issues leads to the systems reply of the Chinese room argument and tries to illustrate that Searle's response to the systems reply does not detract from the symbol manipulation approach.
|Keywords||Turing Searle symbol maipulation approach physical symbol system hypothesis Block Chinese room Turing test|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Minds, Machines and Searle.Stevan Harnad - 1989 - Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Artificial Intelligence 1 (4):5-25.
Other Bodies, Other Minds: A Machine Incarnation of an Old Philosophical Problem. [REVIEW]Stevan Harnad - 1991 - Minds and Machines 1 (1):43-54.
On Turing's Turing Test and Why the Matter Matters.Justin Leiber - 1995 - Synthese 104 (1):59-69.
Virtual Symposium on Virtual Mind.Patrick Hayes, Stevan Harnad, Donald R. Perlis & Ned Block - 1992 - Minds and Machines 2 (3):217-238.
A Modal Defence of Strong AI.Steffen Borge - 2007 - In Dermot Moran Stephen Voss (ed.), The Proceedings of the Twenty-First World Congress of Philosophy. The Philosophical Society of Turkey. pp. 127-131.
Turing's o-Machines, Searle, Penrose, and the Brain.Jack Copeland - 1998 - Analysis 58 (2):128-138.
Added to index2012-02-02
Total downloads725 ( #1,236 of 2,143,902 )
Recent downloads (6 months)120 ( #922 of 2,143,902 )
How can I increase my downloads?
There are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.