Summary

Responses to the Chinese Room thought experiment, exploring different viewpoints and theoretical approaches to the concept of understanding in artificial intelligence and related aspects of cognitive science. The document delves into possible solutions and alternatives to the challenge posed by strong AI, also touches on the topic of intentionality.

Full Transcript

Russian Room : Responses Background to the Russian room The Russian room argument exploits an intuitive contrast between The way that the outputs of a computer result from operations on strings of symbols (“1”s and “0”s) The way that human behavior results from rational thought...

Russian Room : Responses Background to the Russian room The Russian room argument exploits an intuitive contrast between The way that the outputs of a computer result from operations on strings of symbols (“1”s and “0”s) The way that human behavior results from rational thought involving propositional attitudes Searle uses the Chinese room argument to argue that this contrast is fatal to the project of strong AI (idea that appropriately programmed computers might be minds) PSSH is committed to strong AI Possible Responses (1)Reject the intuition that the person in the Russian room does not understand Russian (2)Concede that the person does not genuinely understand Russian, but find an alternative explanation of the lack of understanding that does not rule out strong AI (3)Concede that the Russian room does not genuinely understand Russian, but show how we might build up to a system that does understand Russian Doesn’t understanding come in degrees? Intentionality (Aboutness) Hous e Systems reply Even if we agree that the the person in the room only has a “phrase book” understanding of Russian, this is perfectly compatible with the system as a whole having genuine linguistic understanding The systems reply This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-SA The systems reply This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-SA Sentences and computer states have derived intentionality. They get their meaning from us. But symbols in our brain must have original intentionality. So where do they get their meaning? Strategy 3: robot reply The input-output test is not a good criterion for genuine understanding It is purely verbal A much better test of linguistic understanding is whether the system can interact with the world appropriately obey instructions and commands name and describe objects correctly initiate conversations in a relevant manner Multiple Realizability Advantage – Makes sense of mental states attributions to other species Disadvantage – Committed to counter intuitive attributions of mental states Consciousness in Artifi cial Intelligence A talk given by John Searle to Google

Use Quizgecko on...
Browser
Browser