Digital Computers Are Not Capable Of Genuine Understanding

1670 Words May 29th, 2016 7 Pages
Introduction
I am going to argue that Searle is correct to claim that digital computers are not capable of genuine understanding. I believe computers are told what to do without any genuine understanding of what the computers are doing. It is impossible for a computer programmed machine to think.
Word Count: 48

Exposition Searle believes that machines have no way of genuinely understanding of what they are doing. He believes that the mind and body are one and there is no way of a computer interacting the same way a mind and body interact. The mind acts on causal factors that we have learned from past experiences and emotions. In the Searle’s thought experiment; The Chinese Room, Searle wants to answer if the machine literally understands Chinese or if it is merely simulating the ability to understand Chinese. Searle calls the former “strong AI” and the latter “weak AI”. The computer does not really understand how to speak Chinese. On the other hand, the Turing test states that anything capable of holding a conversation with a human will be deemed artificial intelligence if the human cannot figure out it is a computer. If you take what we learned from Turing’s test and incorporate it into the Chinese room you can see that Turing’s test is easily passed but the human still doesn’t know how to speak Chinese. Whoever is having this Chinese conversation with the computer would not know that they are talking to a computer. According to Searle, the computer can reply to the…
Open Document