Systems reply misses the point

All the Room argument is intended to show is that instantiation of a program that understands Chinese isn't sufficient to prove understanding—as the man instantiates the program and doesn't understand Chinese, the room's understanding is irrelevant.

So the fact that the room as a whole may understand is irrrelvant, because the man (who instantiates the program) doesn't understand Chinese. He is enough of a counterexample by himself.
RELATED ARTICLESExplain
Artificial Intelligence
Can computers think? [1]
Yes: physical symbol systems can think [3]
The Chinese Room Argument [4]
The Systems Reply
Systems reply misses the point
Chinese Room argument commits fallacy of composition
Man in room not in position to judge
The Internalisation Reply
Graph of this discussion
Enter the title of your article


Enter a short (max 500 characters) summation of your article
Enter the main body of your article
Lock
+Comments (0)
+Citations (0)
+About
Enter comment

Select article text to quote
welcome text

First name   Last name 

Email

Skip