Only when you seem to misunderstand it the first time;)
For some people repetition is the only thing that makes them understand.. You might find yourself in that category !!! Or you could delve into the topic in a meaningful way instead of saying that soemthing was disproved decades ago when that isn't true...
The Chinese room argument has not been proven to be false at all. Rather it expresses correctly the algorithimic understanding of computational power. The argument is sound and logically correct.
Actually one need not be a theologian to discuss this issue. I refer you folks to John Searle, professor of philosophy at Berkley. He recently wrote an article ( found in the New York review of Books) reviewing Kurzweil's work and he lambasted it. Seems Kuzweil is working under the assumption that human brains are simply computational machines. therefore we could make a computer that is a replication of the human brain. But Searle rejects this idea. His famous "Chinese Room" argument proves how false that notion is. Human brains are more than sophisticated computational machines. The best example is that of cognition and consciouness. These things show that mental states and brain states are linked but not equvalent. Kurzweil's work is simply poor science fiction masquerading as science fact....
Slashdot Mirror
Only when you seem to misunderstand it the first time ;)
.. You might find yourself in that category !!! Or you could delve into the topic in a meaningful way instead of saying that soemthing was disproved decades ago when that isn't true...
For some people repetition is the only thing that makes them understand
The Chinese room argument has not been proven to be false at all. Rather it expresses correctly the algorithimic understanding of computational power. The argument is sound and logically correct.
Actually one need not be a theologian to discuss this issue. I refer you folks to John Searle, professor of philosophy at Berkley. He recently wrote an article ( found in the New York review of Books) reviewing Kurzweil's work and he lambasted it. Seems Kuzweil is working under the assumption that human brains are simply computational machines. therefore we could make a computer that is a replication of the human brain. But Searle rejects this idea. His famous "Chinese Room" argument proves how false that notion is. Human brains are more than sophisticated computational machines. The best example is that of cognition and consciouness. These things show that mental states and brain states are linked but not equvalent. Kurzweil's work is simply poor science fiction masquerading as science fact....