Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Searle Chinese Room Philisophy 425750 Kopyası PDF
Searle Chinese Room Philisophy 425750 Kopyası PDF
mental. It shows the superiority of minds in terms of the power of representation and symbolization
To give an example, we can use the verb "to cut". If we use this verb for cake, we express it as
"cutting the cake" and the first object that we will use while performing this verb will be a knife.
But if we use this verb for lawns, we use the phrase "to cut the grass" and this time we will
immediately think of a lawnmower, not a knife as an object. This example overlaps with the concept
of "Background", which is defined by Searle. What is meant by this definition are the abilities,
capacities, and tendencies that people are not in a state of intentional but can apply according to
demand? The existence of this concept closes the meaning gap that may arise from the substitution
Let's move on to Searle's best-known argument. That is the Chinese Room argument. This
argument was a reaction to the concept of powerful artificial intelligence. To put it simply; He
claims that no matter how smart and human-like a computer may be, it can never have a mind,
To get into detail, let's say we don't speak Chinese and we are in a room with two holes, a book,
and a few draft papers. Some Chinese characters from the first hole are sent to you. You translate
these characters using the information in the book and pass your results through the second hole. To
the outside world, it looks like you are speaking Chinese, but you don't really know anything about
Searle's argument comes into play here. This Chinese Room can translate things into Chinese.
But if we ask if he can really understand Chinese, the answer is no. This means, according to Searle,
no matter how well a computer is doing a process, it cannot really understand that process.
Of course, certain people opposed Searle on this issue. For example, according to Stevan
Harnad, Searle actually refers to the concepts of functionalism and numeracy when he says
powerful artificial intelligence and he actually tries to criticize these concepts. Functionalists define
consciousness as information processing units that take place in the brain. Since a computer
program performs its operations according to this definition, it can be claimed by functionalists that
But Searle says "it's impossible". Because what we call consciousness is a physical concept.
Whether you set up a digestion simulation in the computer or simulate a fire, in reality, something
I agree with Searle on this. Because there is doing something with understanding, and there is
just doing it. Naturally, artificial intelligence that can be established cannot have the consciousness
and understanding to go beyond the limits defined for it. It is not programmed that way, and the idea
References
201
3. Searle, John (1999). Mind, Language and Society. London: Orion Books Ltd. p. 108. ISBN
978-0-75380-921-1.
4. Harnad, Stevan (2001), "What's Wrong and Right About Searle's Chinese Room Argument", in
M.; Preston, J., Essays on Searle's Chinese Room Argument, Oxford University Press.
5. Searle 1980