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
    Searle based his argument on Schank's programs, which can... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Philosophy of Language
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Searle's Chinese Room argument is underspecified in a way that undermines its general conclusions about AI understanding.

    Searle based his argument on Schank's programs, which can only respond to a few third-person questions about restaurant scenarios.

    Consciousness & MindPhilosophy of Language
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

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

    Topics

    Philosophy of LanguageConsciousness & Mind

    Related

    A scenario that cannot accommodate first-person personal questions is not repres...Searle intends his conclusions to apply to any AI-produced responses, including ...Searle's Chinese Room argument is underspecified in a way that undermines its ge...

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Philosophy of Language
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    When the Chinese Room conversation is fleshed out to include first-person questi...

    Similar

    Answering even simple questions like 'Did John dine at a restaurant?' ...72%KNA's job is to specify which assertions are appropriate and which are...71%The Chinese Room argument demonstrates that a program simulating under...71%Searle's Chinese Room argument does not impugn Empirical Strong AI — t...69%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: chinese-room
    View source passageHide passage
    Cole (1991, 1994) develops the reply and argues as follows: Searle’s argument requires that the agent of understanding be the computer itself or, in the Chinese Room parallel, the person in the room. However Searle’s failure to understand Chinese in the room does not show that there is no understanding being created. One of the key considerations is that in Searle’s discussion the actual conversation with the Chinese Room is always seriously under specified. Searle was considering Schank’s progr

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective