by translator i meant human translator btw. what this experiment does suggest is that linguistic abilities require energy (the book alone would do nothing). and that they are independent of humanness (the machine could do it), whether they involve 'understanding' or not.
On 8/6/08, Valentina Poletti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Ok, I really don't see how it proves that then. In my view, the book could > be replaced with a chinese-english translator and the same exact outcome > will be given. Both are using their static knowledge for this process, not > experience. > > On 8/6/08, Terren Suydam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >> Hi Valentina, >> >> I think the distinction you draw between the two kinds of understanding is >> illusory. Mutual human experience is also an emergent phenomenon. Anyway, >> that's not the point of the Chinese Room argument, which doesn't say that a >> computer understands symbols in a different way than humans, it says that a >> computer has no understanding, period. >> >> Terren >> >> --- On *Wed, 8/6/08, Valentina Poletti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>* wrote: >> >> My view is that the problem with the Chinese Room argument is precisely >> the manner in which it uses the word 'understanding'. It is implied that in >> this context this word refers to mutual human experience. Understanding has >> another meaning, namely the emergent process some of you described, which >> can happen in a computer in a different way from the way it happens in a >> human being. In fact notice that the experiment says that the computer will >> not understand chinese the way humans do. Therefore it implies the first >> meaning, not the second. >> >> Regarding grounding, I think that any intelligence has to collect data >> from somewhere in order to lear. Where it collects it from will determine >> the type of intelligence it is. Collecting stories is still a way of >> collecting information, but such an intelligence will never be able to move >> in the real world, as it has no clue regarding it. On the other hand an >> intelligence who learns by moving in the real world, yet has never read >> anything, will gather no information from a book. >> ------------------------------ >> *agi* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> >> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/> | >> Modify<https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;>Your Subscription >> <http://www.listbox.com/> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> *agi* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> >> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/> | >> Modify<https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;>Your Subscription >> <http://www.listbox.com/> >> > > > > -- > A true friend stabs you in the front. - O. Wilde > > Einstein once thought he was wrong; then he discovered he was wrong. > > For every complex problem, there is an answer which is short, simple and > wrong. - H.L. Mencken -- A true friend stabs you in the front. - O. Wilde Einstein once thought he was wrong; then he discovered he was wrong. For every complex problem, there is an answer which is short, simple and wrong. - H.L. Mencken ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=108809214-a0d121 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
