3 ms·
Thats not the Chinese Room argument. The argument says just because a system processes X doesn't imply it has consciousness of X.
by cscurmudgeon 4y ago
Thats not the Chinese Room argument. The argument says just because a system processes X doesn't imply it has consciousness of X.
- wrs 4y agoThe flaw is the unsupported assertion that the whole system being conscious of X depends on a part of the system being conscious of X. The same assertion would fail here in the same way.
- mensetmanusman 4y agoAt these levels of discussion everything is asserted as axioms to see what the consequences are. If a human isn’t conscious of Chinese, but the arrangement of paper rules is, one would have to assert that paper + human is conscious.
- cscurmudgeon 4y agoAre you talking about access consciousness or phenomenal consciousness?