Searle's Systems Reply

If the machine is in S2, and sees a “1”, it says Even and returns to S1. The purpose of this case Block provided us is to give us a direct insight to how a functionalist theory works. The nature of a mental state in a human mind is equivalent to the nature of a machines state; therefore, it can demonstrate the relations to other states and to inputs and outputs.

Often, we understand what is communicated to us, not by what we hear, but by what we see. This can be demonstrated in Albert Mehrebian’s Three Elements of Communication, that only 7% of what we understand comes from the words which are being used. 38 % is understood by the voice of the sender but an incredible 55 % of communication is done by body language. A tapping of the

The documentary Alien of the Deep Sea presented us with six different experiments aimed at studying different aspects of octopuses' intelligence. I will focus on just one of those experiments and attempt to apply Jackendoff's First Fundamental Argument which argues that a language user's mind can be viewed as an internal computational system containing unconscious set of rules.

John Searle, devises his “Chinese Room Experiment” in order to challenge Alan Turing’s assumptions rather a machine can think. Searle believes that the Turing Test is insufficient, because a machine can’t really think without knowing what's it doing . He believes that the Turing test doesn't require an individual to have intelligence in order to pass. By proving so, the Chinese Room Experiment is an example that explains why machines aren’t really intelligent since it is just programmed to stimulate the answers desired. Alan Turing proposed “The Imitation Game” in order to address and measure a more defined question around the level of technology.

It is difficult enough to interpret words accurately, in fact, there are no doubt more misinterpreted messages than not (Cherney and Tynan, 1990). When the element of nonverbal is incorporated, the rate of misinterpretations increases dramatically (Elgin, 1980).

In one experiment, young wild-born chimpanzees and Children aged 3-4 years were shown how to get a little reward out of a puzzle box. In the first condition of the experiment the puzzle box was transparent, whereas in the second condition the puzzle box was opaque. If the box was opaque chimps and children were unable to look at the internal workings of the puzzle box and were unable to inquire which steps were necessary and which were not. In this condition, both, children and chimps, copied all the actions shown by the demonstrator. However, if the puzzle box was transparent, and children and chimps were able to distinguish which steps were necessary and which were not, chimps only

Cognitive Information Processing (CIP), Cognitive Development and Interactional Development are theories of learning based upon the idea that learning is an internal process rather than merely something that can be observed like behaviorism. Here I examine the three theories as they relate to a scenario of a young man attempting to learn to play a keyboard. The objective is to show the similarities and differences in the three theories and how each can be applied to a given situation. As Kermit is an adult, some of the more specific elements may or may not apply and each theory has gaps in it that make it incomplete of itself. Yet, each also

According to the U.S. Population Clock, there are approximately 318,790,075. These numbers consist of people from all walks of life representing a variety of races, creeds, ethnicities, and religions with their own set of values, beliefs, and customs. Thus, two people from different cultures may not fully understand each other even if they are familiar with one another’s language in general. Sign language interpreters (SLI) are people who facilitate communication between Deaf people, hard-of-hearing people, and hearing-people of different races, ethnicities, religions, etc. Since “cultural context…provides the overall framework wherein humans learn to organize their thoughts, emotions, and behaviors…” (Neuliep, 2012), it is

John Searle formulated the Chinese Room Argument in the early 80’s as an attempt to prove that computers are not cognitive operating systems. In short though the immergence of artificial and computational systems has rapidly increased the infinite possibility of knowledge, Searle uses the Chinese room argument to shown that computers are not cognitively independent.

When Searle talks about institutional facts I believe that he has great insight into the way people take items and place values on them. These values are universally accepted and become a social reality in our social world. These social realities have functions that man has assigned to them to dictate what they are intended to do. I will walk through Searle’s features needed in a social reality and it will become clear that all social realities have these features. But where Searle ideas are flawed is when he says that there are no functions found in nature, and it is also my aim to expose this flaw in his foundation of his ideas of social reality. I believe that for social reality to have Searle’s posited features makes sense, but it

The interpretation of those perceptions are basic to the process of communication, because the way a message is interpreted varies according to the

In the chapter dealing with communication models, we understand that models help us understand what we perceive and also help us understand how out thinking works. Models have an impact on the way we anticipate and respond as well. The book gives the example of the universe and about how it comprises of the idea of the earth as a sphere and about how it spins on an imaginary axis and revolves around the sun. This theoretical assumption helps us to come up with predictions of climate, seasons, light and dark. Language is the means by

In the same way the language barrier hinders conversation. Mr. Shi knows little English and mostly speaks in Chinese. This hinders true communication between him and Madam, a woman he meets in the park He feels that “sometimes they run out of English” (406). When there are no more English words to be said, both revert to their native language. Neither Mr. Shi nor Madame truly understands what is being said. Mr. Shi wishes at times to communicate to Madam in English: “But he is sure, even before he starts that his English would fail him” (406). This struggle for words indicates the lack of communication between him and Madam, but it also indicates the language barrier between him and his daughter. He speaks primarily in Chinese, and while his daughter knows Chinese, she prefers to speak English: “It’s different Baba. We talk in English, and it’s easier. I don’t talk well in Chinese” (413). His daughter does not like speaking in Chinese, and Mr. Shi struggles to converse in English. This problem undermines their relationship.

One cognitive attempt to solve the question is, perhaps, connectionism (e.g., Rumelhart & McClelland, 1986) on the basis of “pan-psychism view of consciousness” (Chalmers). The Connectionist model is the idea that humans learn language via gradual inter-networked association of neural units to “understand” and produce language. That is, human linguistic expression is possible because of the presence of various networks of neural associations. In this framework, the meanings and knowledge in the linguistic input are distributed across various neurons and the joint connection of each unit of neurons thus yields into linguistic output. For example, a sentence such as “Alex is a dog” is stored as a set of weights across many units, and these are sensitive to semantic content rather than the physical symbols. ‘Dog’ might be a pattern across networks of units which represent color, size, sound and eating habits and so on. Then, a network which stores ‘dog’ as a distributed pattern of color and size features could find one set of weights which can represent other animals as well (McClelland, Rumelhart, 1986). If this model is plausible, we could ascribe meaning and knowledge in the linguistic input for artificial intelligence the same way that humans learn language.

When an interaction of this kind appears,It is safe to say that we have a language and a meaning. ' 'A symbol is something which stays for something else,for example words refers to objects. ' '(Giddens,p22) However,in order such an interaction to occur,all the participants must understand the meanings of the symbols used by them altogether.