3 ms·
> This is exactly what it is... I'm literally taking the narrow conclusion from the second paragraph: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/chinese-room/ https://
by jamesrom 4y ago
> This is exactly what it is...
I'm literally taking the narrow conclusion from the second paragraph: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/chinese-room/ https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/chinese-room/
> This is exactly what it is ... albeit not "consciousness" proper
Which is it? You conceded the first point in the second.
> The Turing test is much weaker than the Chinese room experiment.
Yes agreed, this comment on the Turing test was a reference to the linked article that makes the same claim. I'm not conflating consciousness with "being able to pass the Turing test". It's a remark on how understanding consciousness need not be a prerequisite of consciousness.
- dvt 4y ago> I'm literally taking the narrow conclusion from the second paragraph: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/chinese-room/ https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/chinese-room/ You should really the entire article, but at least finish the paragraph you're citing: "The broader conclusion of the argument is that the theory that human minds are computer-like computational or information processing systems is refuted."
- jamesrom 4y agoI have read the whole thing. My point is I’m taking the narrow conclusion and not the broader conclusion, if I have to spell it out to you. Please continue not responding to the rest of my points.