comments

The Internalisation Reply

Suppose the man in the Room memorizes the rule book and all the symbols and does the matching in his head not on paper. He incorporates the entire Room system, but still doesn't understand Chinese. So the whole system doesn't understand Chinese.

John Searle 1980a, 1980b & 1990b.



RELATED ARTICLESExplain
⌅
Artificial Intelligence
⌃
Can computers think? [1]
⌃
Yes: physical symbol systems can think [3]
⌃
The Chinese Room Argument [4]
⌃
The Systems Reply
■
The Internalisation Reply
↳
A dilemma about cognition and intentionality
↳
Man understands Chinese but can't translate to English
↳
Phenomenology not required
↳
The "part-of" principle is fallacious
↳
The levels of conscious involvement dilemma
↳
The Subsystem understands
↳
Understanding is a result of speed and complexity
↳
We lack intuitions about the internalizing man
⇥
John Searle
□
Chinese Room argument commits fallacy of composition
□
Man in room not in position to judge
□
Systems reply misses the point
□
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