The Systems reply to the Chinese Gym

Searle's Chinese Gym argument commits the same fallacy as the Chinese Room argument commits. It is invalid to infer that the gym as a whole doesn’t understand Chinese from the fact that the individuals in the gym don’t understand Chinese.

Note: Also see the "Can the Chinese Room, considered as a total system, think?" arguments on Map 4.

Jack Copeland, 1993.
RELATED ARTICLESExplain
Artificial Intelligence
Can computers think? [1]
Yes: connectionist networks can think [5a]
Connectionist networks are formal systems
The Chinese Gym Argument
The Systems reply to the Chinese Gym
Jack Copeland
Chinese Gym requires preposterous number of people
No individual neuron understands Chinese
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