I will explain the reasons for how John Searle's arguments are against the claim that computers are an actual thinking thing.
I'll first talk about how Searle was lead to question the claim of computers being things that could actually think and were considered to have a strong sense intelligence based on the assumptions made by Alan Turing. He developed a test called the "Turing test" or, in other words, the "Imitation Game". The "Turing test" was a test that used a person (interrogator) who asked two subjects (a human and a computer) a series of questions that aided the integrator in determining which of the subjects was actually a human. (A.M. Turing, 1950, pg.) The assumptions based on the test included: If something has the ability to have thought then it is considered a thinker. The other assumption in question is that not only humans have the capability of having a mind, but other things including objects could also have a mind which makes them a thinking thing. These assumptions made Searle question on how the assumptions could be accurate, so in order to try to find a way to argue that the assumptions are not valid, so he created his experiment called the "Chinese Room Experiment". With this experiment, Searle was able to provide arguments that go against the claim proposed from the "Turing test" which I will discuss
…show more content…
next.Moving to how Searle designed the "Chinese Room Experiment", a person is locked in a room and is given three sets of Chinese systems and instructions that are provided in English. With the instructions, the person would be able to group the Chinese characters based on how similar the shapes of the characters. So the result of the experiment would mean that the person locked in the room would be considered flute in Chinese by others outside the room. However, in reality, the person in the room would still not know the Chinese language giving them the ability to fool others outside the room into thinking that they would understand Chinese when they actually can not. With that, Searle argued that he would be capable enough to pass the Turing test since he and the other subject (computer) would have the same level of intelligence. (Searle, 1980, page 419) I will defend this claim by stating the fact that a computer can be programmed with the certain sequences of the Chinese symbols and instructions given in the "Chinese room experiment" which the computer would be able to figure out how to group the Chinese symbols together just as the same as a person would.
The programming of the computer could be set as an equation which with a given input, it can be calculated and then it spit out the answer or output. With this support, a computer is not considered a thinking thing since the computer is given certain programming that would give it the ability to pass a test like the "Turing
Test."
Computationalism: the view that computation, an abstract notion of materialism lacking semantics and real-world interaction, offers an explanatory basis for human comprehension. The main purpose of this paper is to discuss and compare different views regarding computationalism, and the arguments associated with these views. The two main arguments I feel are the strongest are proposed by Andy Clark, in “Mindware: Meat Machines”, and John Searle in “Minds, Brains, and Programs.”
In the essay "Toward An Intelligence Beyond Man’s" by Robert Jastrow, the author showed his view on computer intelligence and predicted that computer intelligence will be a new kind of evolution. Jastrow stateed that computer nowadays is as intelligent as human brain; they can communicate with human, learn from experience, and raise logical questions. The more complex the computer, the better they imitate human. He predicted that computer will as important as life in future years. Then, Jastrow used the example of Arthur Samuel and IBM computer to show computers can learn faster through motivation, even they do not have emotions and drives as human do. He also points out that computer and human brain share some characteristics; they both freeze out when handle too many tasks, and they outclass fast decisions under a crisis. Jastrow said even human still have the control power, computers learn much faster than humans’ intelligence. Then, in an ultimate situation, computers and human w ill become partners; they completely depends on each other to survive. However, Jastrow thought this partnership will not stay long; as computer will become more and more clever , but human evolution of intelligence is almost finished. He suggested that computer will be the new kind of intelligence which surpass human, as a new evolution of life. He said the history had proved it takes a million year for human evolution. It took less time , compare to a billion years of evolution from worm to human. By the incredibly fast rate of technology improvement, Jastrow thought computer will evolve in a much shorter period of time.
Searle's argument delineates what he believes to be the invalidity of the computational paradigm's and artificial intelligence's (AI) view of the human mind. He first distinguishes between strong and weak AI. Searle finds weak AI as a perfectly acceptable investigation in that it uses the computer as a strong tool for studying the mind. This in effect does not observe or formulate any contentions as to the operation of the mind, but is used as another psychological, investigative mechanism. In contrast, strong AI states that the computer can be created so that it actually is the mind. We must first describe what exactly this entails. In order to be the mind, the computer must be able to not only understand, but to have cognitive states. Also, the programs by which the computer operates are the focus of the computational paradigm, and these are the explanations of the mental states. Searle's argument is against the claims of Shank and other computationalists who have created SHRDLU and ELIZA, that their computer programs can (1) be ascribe...
Searle’s argument is one against humans having free will. The conclusion comes from his view on determinism and his view on substances. His view on substances is a materialist one. To him, the entire world is composed of material substances. All occurrences can be explained by these materials.
John Searle’s Chinese room argument from his work “Minds, Brains, and Programs” was a thought experiment against the premises of strong Artificial Intelligence (AI). The premises of conclude that something is of the strong AI nature if it can understand and it can explain how human understanding works. I will argue that the Chinese room argument successfully disproves the conclusion of strong AI, however, it does not provide an explanation of what understanding is which becomes problematic when creating a distinction between humans and machines.
In “Can Computers Think?”, Searle argues that computers are unable to think like humans can. He argues this
In this paper I will evaluate and present A.M. Turing’s test for machine intelligence and describe how the test works. I will explain how the Turing test is a good way to answer if machines can think. I will also discuss Objection (4) the argument from Consciousness and Objection (6) Lady Lovelace’s Objection and how Turing responded to both of the objections. And lastly, I will give my opinion on about the Turing test and if the test is a good way to answer if a machine can think.
At the end of chapter two, Searle summarizes his criticism of functionalism in the following way. The mental processes of a mind are caused entirely by processes occurring inside the brain. There is no external cause that determines what a mental process will be. Also, there is a distinction between the identification of symbols and the understanding of what the symbols mean. Computer programs are defined by symbol identification rather than understanding. On the other hand, minds define mental processes by the understanding of what a symbol means. The conclusion leading from this is that computer programs by themselves are not minds and do not have minds. In addition, a mind cannot be the result of running a computer program. Therefore, minds and computer programs are not entities with the same mental state. They are quite different and although they both are capable of input and output interactions, only the mind is capable of truly thinking and understanding. This quality is what distinguishes the mental state of a mind from the systemic state of a digital computer.
...ing Test and scientists of AI have different opinions about it. However there are some facts of which we can be sure of. The Turing Test was invented by a great scientist, it has had a long and rich history of 55 years and has played an important role in the science of Artificial Intelligence.
The official foundations for "artificial intelligence" were set forth by A. M. Turing, in his 1950 paper "Computing Machinery and Intelligence" wherein he also coined the term and made predictions about the field. He claimed that by 1960, a computer would be able to formulate and prove complex mathematical theorems, write music and poetry, become world chess champion, and pass his test of artificial intelligences. In his test, a computer is required to carry on a compelling conversation with humans, fooling them into believing they are speaking with another human. All of his predictions require a computer to think and reason in the same manner as a human. Despite 50 years of effort, only the chess championship has come true. By refocusing artificial intelligence research to a more humanlike, cognitive model, the field will create machines that are truly intelligent, capable of meet Turing's goals. Currently, the only "intelligent" programs and computers are not really intelligent at all, but rather they are clever applications of different algorithms lacking expandability and versatility. The human intellect has only been used in limited ways in the artificial intelligence field, however it is the ideal model upon which to base research. Concentrating research on a more cognitive model will allow the artificial intelligence (AI) field to create more intelligent entities and ultimately, once appropriate hardware exists, a true AI.
...lligent, intentional activity taking place inside the room and the digital computer. The proponents of Searle’s argument, however, would counter that if there is an entity which does computation, such as human being or computer, it cannot understand the meanings of the symbols it uses. They maintain that digital computers do not understand the input given in or the output given out. But it cannot be claimed that the digital computers as whole cannot understand. Someone who only inputs data, being only a part of the system, cannot know about the system as whole. If there is a person inside the Chinese room manipulating the symbols, the person is already intentional and has a mental state, thus, due to the seamless integration of their systems of hardware and software that understand the inputs and outputs as whole systems, digital computers too have states of mind.
Computational thinking is a way of solving problems. Computational thinking is a fundamental part of the way people think and understand the world. Everyone uses computational thinking every day e.g. when you wake up you think of going to the bathroom or to the kitchen. Computational thinking is used to help solve problems, before any problem can be resolved you need to understand it first. Once the problem is understood we develop ways of solving it. There are four corner stones of computational thinking, one is decomposition, two is pattern recognition, three is pattern generalisation & abstraction and fourth is algorithms.
In 1950, Alan Turing (1912-1954) introduced the “Turing Test”, an evaluation of a machine’s ability to show intelligent behavior indistinguishable from a human’s. This made me ask, “Can machines think?” To start, we need to define the meaning of the terms “think” and “machine”. In order to think, you’d require creativity, the qualification to remember experiences, and the ability to make rational decisions. A machine has several parts that apply mechanical power. Each part has a definite function, and together perform a particular programmed task. Thus, I believe machines can “think” because they have logic, memory, and originality.
Well as I said we first must define ‘to think’. What does that mean? Webster’s New Compact Dictionary defines ‘think’ as "1. Have a mind. 2. Believe. 3. Employ the mind.". It defines mind as ‘to think’. So does this mean that if you can think does this mean you have a mind? My opinion is that, according to this definition, computers can think. A computer can give you an answer to the question ‘What is 4x13?’, so it can think. What’s that? You say it’s just programmed to do that, if no one programmed it wouldn’t be able to do that. Well how did you know how to answer the question? Your teacher or parent’s or someone taught it to you. So you were programmed, same as the computer was.
In the past few decades we have seen how computers are becoming more and more advance, challenging the abilities of the human brain. We have seen computers doing complex assignments like launching of a rocket or analysis from outer space. But the human brain is responsible for, thought, feelings, creativity, and other qualities that make us humans. So the brain has to be more complex and more complete than any computer. Besides if the brain created the computer, the computer cannot be better than the brain. There are many differences between the human brain and the computer, for example, the capacity to learn new things. Even the most advance computer can never learn like a human does. While we might be able to install new information onto a computer it can never learn new material by itself. Also computers are limited to what they “learn”, depending on the memory left or space in the hard disk not like the human brain which is constantly learning everyday. Computers can neither make judgments on what they are “learning” or disagree with the new material. They must accept into their memory what it’s being programmed onto them. Besides everything that is found in a computer is based on what the human brain has acquired though experience.