- Discover essay samples

Individual Understanding

4.9 of 5.0 (130 reviews)

928 words

Individual Understanding Page 1
Individual Understanding Page 2
Individual Understanding Page 3
The above thumbnails are of reduced quality. To view the work in full quality, click download.

Individual Understanding

Individual Understanding

I agree with functionalists, specifically the strong Artificial Intelligence (AI) camp, concerning the concept of understanding. While John Searle poses a strong non-functionalist case in his AChinese Room@ argument, I find that his definition of Ato understand@ falls short and hampers his point. I criticize his defense that understanding rests on a standardized knowledge of meaning, but not before outlining the general background of the issue.

Functionalists define thought and mental states in terms of input and output. They claim that what we see, hear, smell, taste, and touch (input) creates a mental state or belief, and that particular mental state in turn creates our reaction (output). If I see it=s raining outside, I believe that if I go outside I will get wet, and therefore I take an umbrella with me. The functionalists define a mental state strictly through its cause and effect relationships, through its function.

This thinking leads to the conclusion that the human brain is little more than a big, complex computer. All we humans do is take input, process it, and accordingly create output, just like a computer. In fact, functionalists who support strong AI go so far as to say that an appropriately programmed computer actually has all the same mental states and capabilities as a human. In AMinds, Brains, and Programs,@ John Searle outlines this argument:

AIt is a characteristic of human beings= story understanding capacity that they can answer questions about [a] story even though the information they give was never explicitly stated in the story. . . . [Strong AI claims that m]achines can similarly answer questions about [stories] in this fashion. . . . Partisans of strong AI claim that in this question and answer sequence the machine is not only simulating a human ability but also (1) that the machine can literally be said to understand the story . . . and (2) that what the machine and its program do explains the human ability to understand the story and answer questions about it@ (354).

While strong AI claims that a machine can understand just as a human understands, Searle himself disagrees. He claims that a strictly input-output system, such as a computer is, cannot understand anything, nor does it explain humans= ability to understand. In criticizing strong AI, Searle creates his famous AChinese Room@ argument: suppose that Searle was locked in a room with a large batch of Chinese writing. Here, Searle knows absolutely no Chinese, but he does understand English fluently. For Searle, AChinese writing is just so many meaningless squiggles@ (355). Then, someone slips under the door another set of Chinese writing, but along with it an English rulebook. The rulebook shows Searle how to simply correlate one Chinese symbol with another, identifying them only by shape and not by meaning. Searle then strings together his meaningless Chinese symbols according to the English rulebook, and slips his Awriting@ under the door. More Chinese symbols come in, and in response Searle simply pieces new ones together and sends them back out.

The question at hand: does Searle understand Chinese? If he becomes good enough at piecing the symbols together, a native Chinese speaker outside the room would say yes, Searle does understand Chinese. Chinese questions were sent in, and flawless answers came back out. There were input (Chinese questions), obvious processing (Searle=s matching symbols according to the rulebook), and appropriate output (Searle=s pieced-together responses), just as strong AI proposes. But is this understanding?

Searle claims it is not. He argues that locked in the room, he certainly does not understand Chinese. AI have inputs and outputs that are indistinguishable from those of [a] native Chinese speaker, and I can have any formal program you like, but I still understand nothing. For the same reason,@ Searle claims, A[strong AI=s] computer understands nothing of any stories . . .@ He goes on to argue that with English sentences, he knows what they mean, and therefore understands them, but with the Chinese symbols, he knows nothing of their meaning and therefore does not understand them (357).

One of the many functionalist responses to Searle=s Chinese Room argument claims that while ASearle may not understand Chinese, the room does.@ This view concedes that in looking at Searle as an independent individual, he obviously does not understand the meaning of his Awriting.@ However this response also seems to claim that Searle is not really independent, but rather a piece of a larger whole, and in looking at the room as a whole system, there actually does exist an understanding of the Chinese writing.

Inside of the room exist three things: Searle, an English rulebook, and a big batch of Chinese writing symbols. While Searle, one of the three, may not individually understand Chinese, the functioning of the three together creates an understanding. The symbols exist already, but are not structured in any particular order; they need direction to create meaning. The English rulebook gives that direction, but cannot execute its instructions; it needs a processing unit. Searle can follow the rulebook=s instructions and give proper order to the Chinese symbols. As the third and final Aprocessor piece,@ he may not understand the symbols nor why he places one after another, but an understanding exists in the working of the three pieces together. According to certain functionalists, therefore, the room, as a whole system composed of smaller parts, understands Chinese.

Searle is not convinced. His response, he claims, Ais ...

You are currently seeing 50% of this paper.

You're seeing 928 words of 1855.

Keywords: understanding individual differences, understanding individual human mobility patterns, understanding individual behaviour, understanding individual behavior, understanding individual behaviour pdf, understanding individual entrepreneurial mindset and personality, understanding individual differences and psychological contract, understanding individual differences among learners

Similar essays

Saftey On Mount Everest

Did you know that one out of every six climbers dies on each expedition? In my opinion I think that there should be guidelines and regulations to climb Mt. Everest. One reason is that just any person that wants to go up there can pay 65,000-100,000 dollars just to go up to Everest not even knowing nothing about mountain climbing. Second reason is t...

144 reviews
The Sinister Beauty Of Death

Throughout the history of human kind, there have existed a significant number of poets, who did not care to write about ?happy things.? Rather, they concerned themselves with unpleasant and sinister concepts, such as death. Fascination and personification of death has become a common theme in poetry, but very few poets mastered it as well as Emil...

89 reviews
Descriptive Essay Two Girls At

It was a busy Saturday afternoon at the Galleria at Tyler, many different people walking in and out of the large department stores and inside the interior of the mall. However, the vast majority of people walking among the mall were groups of young teenage girls. The mall has become the major hangout for teenagers, where both males and females ro...

80 reviews
Sibling rivalry

Relationship ?Children are the essence of the family life but can become the driving destructive force that splits or divides them up? (Dr Barbara Wallace, 1995). Recently it has been realised that siblings have an enormous impact on one another not just through early childhood but long into the lifespan. Previously it was thought that p...

98 reviews
Youth gangs an overview

Introduction Youth gangs and the myriad of problems associated with them were once thought to involve a relatively small number of major urban areas whose gang troubles mirrors those of the stereotypical West Side Story scenario. Isolated, under-privileged, youth involved with petty crime and "intimate" physical force played-out only amongs...

132 reviews
Atsisiųsti šį darbą