3 ms·
I've never been able to figure out how this (and most other philosophical arguments against AI) don't apply just as well to individual neurons. Though I suppose
by camccann 17y ago
I've never been able to figure out how this (and most other philosophical arguments against AI) don't apply just as well to individual neurons. Though I suppose if one wants to frame it as an argument that neither computers nor human brains are capable of intelligence, I might be persuaded.
In fact, for sake of argument, I claim that I am, in fact, just an elaborate system of symbolic manipulation with no actual comprehension or conscious experience, a bunch of meaningless neural impulses with no greater understanding of English than the "Chinese Room" understands Chinese; and I invite anyone to attempt to persuade me otherwise.
- ThomPete 17y agoThe answer to his argument is we don't know The man in the room is the neuron it's the house that is the brain.
- benpbenp 17y agoI think the fact that the argument is equally applicable to the human brain gets at the heart of the general problem of consciousness, of which AI is just a special case. Consciousness is not an observable phenomenon (excepting one's experience of one's own consciousness), so it seems unlikely to me that we can ever understand it in terms of observable phenomena-- i.e. as a function/result of things like neurons or transistors.