机器能理解吗:一种基于证据的中文室方法

Keiland W Cooper
{"title":"机器能理解吗:一种基于证据的中文室方法","authors":"Keiland W Cooper","doi":"10.14434/IUJUR.V4I1.24547","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The debate of a thinking machine continues on, especially in an era where machines are achieving tasks that we never thought possible. In this essay, I explore one of the most famous critiques of the thinking machine, Searle’s Chinese room, by breaking down his argument into two claims of varying scope. I then offer an alternative method to assess this argument, by employing a top down approach in contrast to Searles which seems to advance from the conclusion. I explore the current thinking on how the human brain may come to understand the world, as well as some of the aspects of these semantics. This is all in an effort to elucidate some the features necessary for machine understanding and to accurately assess whether a machine possesses them. I conclude that Searle may have been too quick to judge the abilities of computers, and that a claim that any digital computer cannot understand is much too strong. ","PeriodicalId":92647,"journal":{"name":"Indiana University journal of undergraduate research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Can the Machine Understand: An Evidence Based Approach to the Chinese Room\",\"authors\":\"Keiland W Cooper\",\"doi\":\"10.14434/IUJUR.V4I1.24547\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The debate of a thinking machine continues on, especially in an era where machines are achieving tasks that we never thought possible. In this essay, I explore one of the most famous critiques of the thinking machine, Searle’s Chinese room, by breaking down his argument into two claims of varying scope. I then offer an alternative method to assess this argument, by employing a top down approach in contrast to Searles which seems to advance from the conclusion. I explore the current thinking on how the human brain may come to understand the world, as well as some of the aspects of these semantics. This is all in an effort to elucidate some the features necessary for machine understanding and to accurately assess whether a machine possesses them. I conclude that Searle may have been too quick to judge the abilities of computers, and that a claim that any digital computer cannot understand is much too strong. \",\"PeriodicalId\":92647,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Indiana University journal of undergraduate research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-12-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Indiana University journal of undergraduate research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14434/IUJUR.V4I1.24547\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indiana University journal of undergraduate research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14434/IUJUR.V4I1.24547","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

关于思考机器的争论仍在继续,尤其是在一个机器正在完成我们从未想过可能完成的任务的时代。在这篇文章中,我将探讨对思维机器最著名的批评之一——塞尔的中文房间,通过将他的论点分解为两个不同范围的主张。然后,我提供了另一种方法来评估这个论点,通过采用一种自上而下的方法,与Searles似乎从结论中推进的方法形成对比。我探讨了当前关于人类大脑如何理解世界的思考,以及这些语义的一些方面。这一切都是为了阐明机器理解所必需的一些特征,并准确地评估机器是否拥有这些特征。我的结论是,Searle对计算机能力的判断可能太快了,认为任何数字计算机都无法理解的说法太过强烈了。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Can the Machine Understand: An Evidence Based Approach to the Chinese Room
The debate of a thinking machine continues on, especially in an era where machines are achieving tasks that we never thought possible. In this essay, I explore one of the most famous critiques of the thinking machine, Searle’s Chinese room, by breaking down his argument into two claims of varying scope. I then offer an alternative method to assess this argument, by employing a top down approach in contrast to Searles which seems to advance from the conclusion. I explore the current thinking on how the human brain may come to understand the world, as well as some of the aspects of these semantics. This is all in an effort to elucidate some the features necessary for machine understanding and to accurately assess whether a machine possesses them. I conclude that Searle may have been too quick to judge the abilities of computers, and that a claim that any digital computer cannot understand is much too strong. 
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Effect of Familiar Music on Long-Term Declarative Memory in College Students Three Strikes and You’re Out: The Demographics of Indiana’s Habitual Offender Law Influences and Willingness to Receive Future COVID-19 Vaccination by Demographic Data and Proposed Interventions Proposed fMRI Study: The Role of Self-Generated Object Formation in Novel Object Category Learning Practices and Perspectives of Mental Health in the Balkan Countries: A Narrative Review
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1