Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Computers cannot understand natural language sentences th... — Carmelics
    Home/Philosophy of Language
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Computers cannot understand natural language sentences they receive or output.

    Consciousness & Mind
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    2 reasons for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Intentionality—the 'aboutness' of mental states—is an intrinsic biological feature of minds, not derivable from formal symbol manipulation (Searle 1983).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Derived intentionality assigned by programmers to computational outputs is categorically distinct from the original intentionality required for genuine understanding.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.No formal syntactic process can bootstrap itself into possessing intrinsic semantic content, since form and meaning belong to ontologically distinct categories.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Understanding a sentence requires knowing what it would be like for its truth conditions to obtain, which presupposes embodied, causal engagement with the world (Wittgenstein, Philosophical Investigations §201).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Digital computers manipulate uninterpreted symbol tokens whose causal connections to worldly referents are entirely parasitic on human interpretation external to the system.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A system whose semantic grounding depends wholly on external interpreters cannot be said to understand on its own terms, any more than a book understands its contents.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Computer programs operate purely syntactically, responding only to the physical form of symbol strings, not their meaning.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Understanding requires associating meanings with words or signs, not merely processing their physical form.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Syntax is not sufficient for, nor constitutive of, semantics.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Philosophy of LanguageConsciousness & Mind

    Related

    A system whose semantic grounding depends wholly on external interpreters cannot...Computer programs operate purely syntactically, responding only to the physical ...Derived intentionality assigned by programmers to computational outputs is categ...Digital computers manipulate uninterpreted symbol tokens whose causal connection...
    +5 moreShow less
    Intentionality—the 'aboutness' of mental states—is an intrinsic biological featu...No formal syntactic process can bootstrap itself into possessing intrinsic seman...Syntax is not sufficient for, nor constitutive of, semantics.Understanding a sentence requires knowing what it would be like for its truth co...Understanding requires associating meanings with words or signs, not merely proc...

    Similar

    The Chinese Room fails to produce understanding because it operates on...74%Lexical knowledge and stereotyped behavioral patterns can drive natura...73%Formal statements cannot be directly abstracted from informally expres...72%Classical computers do not genuinely understand language or meaning.72%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: chinese-room
    View source passageHide passage
    Searle believes the Chinese Room argument supports a larger point, which explains the failure of the Chinese Room to produce understanding. Searle argued that programs implemented by computers are just syntactical. Computer operations are “formal” in that they respond only to the physical form of the strings of symbols, not to the meaning of the symbols. Minds on the other hand have states with meaning, mental contents. We associate meanings with the words or signs in language. We respond to sig
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (2 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit