Abstract
By ‘Computational Philosophy of Mind’ we mean the overlap area between ‘artificial intelligence’ (AI) and philosophy of mind. This overlap area is attracting increasing interest from a number of philosophers and AI researchers. The origins of the overlap area can be traced back to Turing’s seminal paper in 1950,1 and to five of the nine objections that Turing himself raised to his own reformulation of the question, ‘Can machines think?’ The five objections are: ‘The Argument from Informality of Behaviour’, ‘The Argument from Consciousness’, ‘The Argument from Continuity in the Nervous System’, ‘The Mathematical Objection’, and ‘Lady Lovelace’s Objection’. Turing’s reformulation of the question, called the ‘Imitation Game’, and the various objections he envisages, are well documented, and we shall not deal with them here. The important point is that Searle has recently expressed criticisms of artificial intelligence (the ‘strong’ variety) which embody all five of these objections, and his criticism can therefore be regarded as modern expressions of these objections. Our aim is to evaluate critically Searle’s views and put them in the context of a developing area of philosophy.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
A. M. Turing, ‘Computing Machinery and Intelligence’, Mind, vol LIX (1950) pp. 433–60.
J. R. Searle, ‘Minds, Brains and Programs’, The Behavioural and Brain Science Vol.3 (1980) pp. 417–24. reprinted in
J. Haugeland (ed.), Mind Design, (MIT Press, 1981), pp. 282–306, from which page references are taken; and in
D.R. Hofstadter and D.C. Dennet (eds), The Mind’s I: Fantasies and Reflections on Self and Soul, (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1981).
W.J. Hutchins, Machine Translation: Past, Present, Future, (Chichester: Ellis Horwood, 1988).
A. Narayanan, On Being a Machine (Volume 1): Formal Aspects of Artificial Intelligence, (Chichester: Ellis Horwood, 1988).
Ibid., reprinted in J.R. Anderson (ed.), Minds and Machines (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1964), p. 48.
A. Narayanan, ‘What is it Like to be a Machine?’, in S. Torrance (ed.), The Mind and the Machine: Philosophical Aspects of Artificial Intelligence (Chichester: Ellis Horwood, 1984).
J. R. Searle, ‘Minds and Brains Without Programs’ in C. Blakemore and S. Greenfield (eds), Mindwaves, (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1987), pp. 213–4.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 1991 Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Limited
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Narayanan, A. (1991). The Chinese Room Argument: An Exercise in Computational Philosophy of Mind. In: Mahalingam, I., Carr, B. (eds) Logical Foundations. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-21232-3_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-21232-3_12
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-21234-7
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-21232-3
eBook Packages: Palgrave Religion & Philosophy CollectionPhilosophy and Religion (R0)