Man in Chinese Room doesn't instantiate a progam
A human being (or a homunculus) shuffling symbols in a room is not a proper instantiation of a computer program, and so the Chinese room argument does not refute AI.


Note: for more multiple realisability arguments see the "Is the brain a computer?" arguments on Map 1, the "Can functional states generate consciousness?" arguments on Map 6 and sidebar "Formal systems: an overview" on Map 7.
CONTEXT(Help)
-
Artificial Intelligence »Artificial Intelligence
▲
Can computers think? [1] »Can computers think? [1]
▲
Yes: physical symbol systems can think [3] »Yes: physical symbol systems can think [3]
▲
The Chinese Room Argument [4] »The Chinese Room Argument [4]
■
Man in Chinese Room doesn't instantiate a progam
●
Implementations of programs must perform reliably »Implementations of programs must perform reliably
●
Computers and humans run programs differently »Computers and humans run programs differently
●
Computers embody programs; they don't obey them »Computers embody programs; they don't obey them
●
Proper instantiations require the right causal connections »Proper instantiations require the right causal connections
●
Simulation requires duplication of functional interconnections »Simulation requires duplication of functional interconnections
●
The proper algorithm is constitutive of thought »The proper algorithm is constitutive of thought
●
A properly designed Chinese room is Turing complete »A properly designed Chinese room is Turing complete
+Comments (0)
+Citations (0)
+About