Home | Community | Message Board


Original Seeds Store - Cannabis Seeds
Please support our sponsors.

General Interest >> Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Jump to first unread post. Pages: 1
InvisibleRavus
Not an EggshellWalker
 User Gallery

Registered: 07/18/03
Posts: 7,991
Loc: Cave of the Patriarchs
Chinese Room Thought Experiment
    #4536775 - 08/15/05 04:50 AM (11 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

In the Chinese room thought experiment, a person who understands no Chinese sits in a room into which written Chinese characters are passed. In the room there is also a book containing a complex set of rules (established ahead of time) to manipulate these characters, and pass other characters out of the room. This would be done on a rote basis, eg. "When you see character X, write character Y". The idea is that a Chinese-speaking interviewer would pass questions written in Chinese into the room, and the corresponding answers would come out of the room appearing from the outside as if there were a native Chinese speaker in the room.

It is Searle's belief that such a system could indeed pass a Turing Test, yet the person who manipulated the symbols would obviously not understand Chinese any better than he did before entering the room. Searle tries to refute the claims of strong AI one at a time, by positioning himself as the one who manipulates the Chinese symbols. The Chinese room assails two claims of Strong AI. The first claim is that a system which can pass the Turing test understands the input and output. Searle replies that as the "computer" in the Chinese room, he gains no understanding of Chinese by simply manipulating the symbols according to the formal program, in this case being the complex rules. The operator of the room need not have any understanding of what the interviewer is asking, or the replies that he is producing. He may not even know that there is a question and answer session going on outside the room.

The second claim of strong AI which Searle objects to is the claim that the system explains human understanding. Searle asserts that since the system is functioning, in this case passing the Turing Test, and yet there is no understanding on the part of the operator, then the system does not understand and therefore could not explain human understanding.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_room

The interesting thing about this thought experiment is that, while it was originally intended as a criticism of strong AI, it could also apply to humans.

The only person we know has intentionality and understanding of their actions is ourselves, because we experience it; our experience is the only one we can store, and therefore verify. We cannot store or verify the experiences of others, and while from our subjective point of view they appear to have the same intentionality and thought as we do, like the Chinese room experiment it is a possibility they do not. We could create an entire army of computers who, like in the Chinese room thought experiment, just pass symbols through according to a rulebook without having any understanding of what those symbols mean. They could, in theory, just be machines mimicking human intentionality without possessing any.

And from the point of view of solipsism, so could everybody else. All the humans around you could be mimicking your own intentionality in their actions without possessing any. They could be organic programs just passing ideas through their mouths to you without understanding anything about the ideas, as there is no way to verify someone else's subjective consciousness as true. Of course you understand the ideas, but how do you know they do? Perhaps using equations and programs a computer could also come up with ideas and tell them to you without possessing any consciousness whatsoever.

Of course, we'll just discard this possibility since it doesn't make life any easier.


--------------------
So long as you are praised think only that you are not yet on your own path but on that of another.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineAvatarofAtavism
Stranger

Registered: 07/14/05
Posts: 153
Loc: canada
Last seen: 11 years, 1 month
Re: Chinese Room Thought Experiment [Re: Ravus]
    #4536802 - 08/15/05 05:20 AM (11 years, 3 months ago)

The nature of the experiment is very interesting to me.

Some minor things to consider that I really don't see effecting it in any serious way.  But maybe i've missed something?  Mandarin symbols are based on actual pictograms, representing actual things.  Massivly simplified to the point of obscurity.  Is it worth considering that the symbols may not be as arbitrarily recognised by the occupant as believed?  What about english symbols for a non-english speaker?  I guess this is the nature of how people interperet symbols.

If you can't prove the difference between a computing engine and a human intellect in terms of pattern recognition, are they on par?  I think it puts them in the same ballpark.  But then, computer intelligence is artifical, made by us, to mimick us?  That's my understanding. 

This reminds me of a very old philosophical engine.  Let me see if I can find the link. It can be asked some fairly abstract questions about what appear to be very subjective things, and it will respond with subjective answers that seem to qualify being, in human terms anyhow.  It mimicks a very enlightened state of mind, in some ways.

http://lullianarts.net/Ars-Magna/contents.html

Lets call this the book.  The computer is the 'man on the inside'.  Seeing the question, and orienting the geometric forms into the proper locations to give an answer.

Isn't that what normal human intelligence is?  You hear/see a collection of information, your (truely complex) interior emotion engine chugs away and gives you an answer, in the form of a feeling.  However, in humans, we perhaps have several engines working at once, to give a sort of range of feeling, a range of what the answer may be, and what it sorta is, heh.  We all invent our own engines of complexity though.  No single person uses the same engine, nor should they.

I guess the key is that we are self created engines, whereas a computer has a very designated creator.  But even that can seem hazy at times.  We don't totally program ourselves, a lot of that is done by pre-existing people in our youth.  Computers, do have the capacity to learn, from very simple programing, to very complex.

All of this shit is beyond me, so sorry if any of what is said is incredibly redundant in the field of AI.  I love this stuff, but admitedly know little about it beyond a sort of childish love to have a robot friend. :laugh:    well, it doesn't have to be a robot, but an AI that I can call a friend, not a tool.

EDIT: I totally just reworded all that you just said, I am sorry.  Lost in thought, but it wasn't even my own it seems!


--------------------
Do not despair, said the mystery. You will always have a friend in me. Untill the day you break my code. Then I will be gone, and you are free...
to manifest another.


Edited by AvatarofAtavism (08/15/05 05:24 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleIcelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Male

Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 93,974
Loc: underbelly
Re: Chinese Room Thought Experiment [Re: Ravus]
    #4536968 - 08/15/05 08:00 AM (11 years, 3 months ago)

And from the point of view of solipsism, so could everybody else. All the humans around you could be mimicking your own intentionality in their actions without possessing any.
_______________________________________________________________

Sounds like a dream. :wink: I have often wondered if I am dreaming this world and all it's characters, and will someday wake up (maybe death) and realize I have just had the strangest dream. (Sound familiar? We do it every night) Maybe I am this elusive (Creator) my dream characters are searching for?


--------------------
"Don't believe everything you think". -Anom.

" All that lives was born to die"-Anom.

With much wisdom comes much sorrow,
The more knowledge, the more grief.
Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineAvatarofAtavism
Stranger

Registered: 07/14/05
Posts: 153
Loc: canada
Last seen: 11 years, 1 month
Re: Chinese Room Thought Experiment [Re: Icelander]
    #4537005 - 08/15/05 08:32 AM (11 years, 3 months ago)

I have had serious fears that many aspects of my life have been scripted in some way. The more I dig to uncover, the farther the debris spreads. It's all there, in plain sight, but too small to pick up and recognise in any individual part.

Everytime I suspect that this is true, I question myself, and my sanity. But it frequently happens. Either I am seeing everything through some kind of cliche-glass window that colours everything I see with falsity, or people are more mechanical in nature and behaviour then I could imagine possible.

But hey, do the symbols and words we use in language have any real 'meaning' to the little fellow in our heads? Or are they totally arbitrary assosciations? The processing of 'knowing/thinking' may not require an understanding of symbol, or language at all, even to the 'little fellow' within the human brain.

Maybe the book of instructions should be seen as the intelligence, not the machenery that works through it. Or maybe all intelligence could be seen as this kind of meld of structure, and method. I mean, it's weird to define things like intelligence to start with. I can honestly think of several reasons why the element of cobalt is an example of 'life' throughout all of space. Bending and percieving definition in different terms.

Seems silly to talk about. I mean, I think about these things, they are very interesting, but when you break everything down into what you can and can not know about something, it is all just talk. I guess the real experiment is analysing how people interperet the outcome. Why do I like describing what I am thinking at this exact moment, when really it has no bearing on my later self, or anything to do with any of you? I don't know. :S


--------------------
Do not despair, said the mystery. You will always have a friend in me. Untill the day you break my code. Then I will be gone, and you are free...
to manifest another.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleIcelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Male

Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 93,974
Loc: underbelly
Re: Chinese Room Thought Experiment [Re: AvatarofAtavism]
    #4537020 - 08/15/05 08:52 AM (11 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

AvatarofAtavism said:  I see with falsity, or people are more mechanical in nature and behaviour then I could imagine possible.




I think it's both. People act out the cultural programing, believe it to be themselves and their thoughs. You see this as their mechanical behavior. Everyperson has a more authentic self underneath this, it can be activated in my experience when you share your authentic self with them. This is what you fail to see (falsity).


 
Quote:

  I mean, I think about these things, they are very interesting, but when you break everything down into what you can and can not know about something, it is all just talk.




:thumbup: So if you cannot know. Why keep spinning the wheels? Engage your authentic, vulnerable, loving self in living. Who knows what will happen then? :thumbup:


--------------------
"Don't believe everything you think". -Anom.

" All that lives was born to die"-Anom.

With much wisdom comes much sorrow,
The more knowledge, the more grief.
Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleTeragon
Noddy

Registered: 02/21/01
Posts: 36,253
Loc: Lost in the Patterns
Re: Chinese Room Thought Experiment [Re: Ravus]
    #4537820 - 08/15/05 02:28 PM (11 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

Ravus said:
And from the point of view of solipsism, so could everybody else. All the humans around you could be mimicking your own intentionality in their actions without possessing any. They could be organic programs just passing ideas through their mouths to you without understanding anything about the ideas, as there is no way to verify someone else's subjective consciousness as true. Of course you understand the ideas, but how do you know they do? Perhaps using equations and programs a computer could also come up with ideas and tell them to you without possessing any consciousness whatsoever.






:thumbup: :thumbup:


--------------------
need that cash to feed them jones.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleRavus
Not an EggshellWalker
 User Gallery

Registered: 07/18/03
Posts: 7,991
Loc: Cave of the Patriarchs
Re: Chinese Room Thought Experiment [Re: Teragon]
    #4537918 - 08/15/05 02:57 PM (11 years, 3 months ago)

Though now that I think about it, I don't think he's really stating anything with any purpose outside of philosophy in this thought experiment.

From a human point of view, what's the difference between a strong AI machine that has programs that create ideas, sentences and mimick emotions without actually feeling them, and a strong AI machine that does all of the above honestly and genuinely, like a human? We wouldn't be able to tell the difference, and to my knowledge there's no possible way to test it since it only exists in the subjective experience of the AI machine, so either way this shouldn't limit artifical intelligence. If there's no way to tell the difference, and no way to test the difference, then is there even a difference at all?


--------------------
So long as you are praised think only that you are not yet on your own path but on that of another.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleDiploidM
Cuban

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
Re: Chinese Room Thought Experiment [Re: Ravus]
    #4539820 - 08/15/05 10:19 PM (11 years, 3 months ago)

The interesting thing about this thought experiment is that, while it was originally intended as a criticism of strong AI, it could also apply to humans.

As I've stated before, I don't think this test represents a human, or a machine that could genuinely pass the Turing Test.

In order for the machine (or the room operator) to genuinely represent a human, some element of non-deterministic randomness must factor into the issue.

In the human, the source of the randomness is way down in the bowels of Quantum Mechanics and the way that randomness influences the folding of proteins that make our brain work. In the case of the room, the operator's instruction book would have to allow for branching in the logic based on the roll of a die.

Given that condition (which I think is the only accurate way to model a human brain) the input/output would vary as a function of the roll of the die. If enough transactions occur, the operator will begin to glean a pattern, and after enough time will learn the grammar of the language.

Without external reference, the words would be meaningless, but then in a human (or a real Turing Machine) there is more interaction with the outside world via senses (sensors) and so a common object dictionary would evolve and full language comprehension would necessarily follow.

AI can never pass the Turing Test until/unless randomness and learning/goal-seeking algorithms are part of the machine, IMO.  :smirk:


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineRedNucleus
Causal Observer
Male User Gallery

Registered: 02/27/01
Posts: 4,074
Loc: The Seahorse Valley
Last seen: 15 days, 14 hours
Re: Chinese Room Thought Experiment [Re: Ravus]
    #4539871 - 08/15/05 10:30 PM (11 years, 3 months ago)

The agents are coming for you.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleRavus
Not an EggshellWalker
 User Gallery

Registered: 07/18/03
Posts: 7,991
Loc: Cave of the Patriarchs
Re: Chinese Room Thought Experiment [Re: Diploid]
    #4539880 - 08/15/05 10:32 PM (11 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

AI can never pass the Turing Test until/unless randomness and learning/goal-seeking algorithms are part of the machine, IMO.




No one's denying this.

I think the entire point of this thought experiment wasn't to show that the machine wouldn't need to be complex to pass the Turing test, as it most certainly would be. However, the machine would not necessarily need to be sapient, conscious or understand the ideas in the Turing test. Just like the person passing the Chinese symbols through, the machine could use programs and weak AI (AI without consciousness or sapience) to appear to be a conscious, thinking computer without actually being one. Hence it could be argued that the Turing test is not a test for sapience and consciousness in a computer, because it's possible the computer is simply weak AI speaking to a human without comprehending what it's saying.

The main problem with this theory is that it is untestable. If a computer can feign being conscious, then how do you tell the difference between that computer and conscious strong AI computer?


--------------------
So long as you are praised think only that you are not yet on your own path but on that of another.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleDiploidM
Cuban

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
Re: Chinese Room Thought Experiment [Re: Ravus]
    #4539947 - 08/15/05 10:45 PM (11 years, 3 months ago)

The main problem with this theory is that it is untestable. If a computer can feign being conscious, then how do you tell the difference between that computer and conscious strong AI computer?

When the machine starts to behave irrationally, perhaps making decisions that are clearly against its interests?


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleRavus
Not an EggshellWalker
 User Gallery

Registered: 07/18/03
Posts: 7,991
Loc: Cave of the Patriarchs
Re: Chinese Room Thought Experiment [Re: Diploid]
    #4539997 - 08/15/05 10:54 PM (11 years, 3 months ago)

For which one? I don't think either a weak or strong AI computer would do that.

You say this based on your observations of humans I presume, but humans have had much more excess baggage put into them by natural selection than computers will have by humans. It's a possibility, but since computers will on the whole only have to deal with the relatively simple "computer nature" and not worry about the survival of their family and self and species, chances are they'll end up being a lot more stable and logical than humans. As long as computers don't develop religion they may be like the Overmen that never were.

Just speculation though, maybe they will go completely haywire.


--------------------
So long as you are praised think only that you are not yet on your own path but on that of another.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleDiploidM
Cuban

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
Re: Chinese Room Thought Experiment [Re: Ravus]
    #4540076 - 08/15/05 11:08 PM (11 years, 3 months ago)

I don't think either a weak or strong AI computer would do that.
You say this based on your observations of humans I presume, but humans have had much more excess baggage put into them by natural selection than computers will have by humans.


But for a machine to pass the TT, its behavior must be indistinguishable from that of a human. This means it must be (at least sometimes) irrational, and if female, make you hold its purse in the bra department at Sears while it tries something on.  :tongue:


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineLipaYai5
Fuzzy

Registered: 07/24/05
Posts: 69
Loc: Mamunia... whoaaooo.
Last seen: 9 years, 4 months
Re: Chinese Room Thought Experiment [Re: Icelander]
    #4540600 - 08/16/05 01:48 AM (11 years, 3 months ago)

-
Quote:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

AvatarofAtavism said: I see with falsity, or people are more mechanical in nature and behaviour then I could imagine possible.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



I think it's both. People act out the cultural programing, believe it to be themselves and their thoughs. You see this as their mechanical behavior. Everyperson has a more authentic self underneath this, it can be activated in my experience when you share your authentic self with them. This is what you fail to see (falsity).




Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I mean, I think about these things, they are very interesting, but when you break everything down into what you can and can not know about something, it is all just talk.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



So if you cannot know. Why keep spinning the wheels? Engage your authentic, vulnerable, loving self in living. Who knows what will happen then?






I love this because it sums up me getting over my fears of other's questionable intetnions while I was haveing the scariest trip of my life at the Spirit of the Swannee. I was so inverted, I felt cold and hard all over, my eyes were so OPEN but my third eye felt clogged... I was going schizo... everything being said around me was NEGATIVE and had to do with me.... I had to psyche myself out... put some true love into my action... this happened everyday after the trip- still today, to not become frozen, i must open my heart, more and more. I LOVE LIFE! the Unconditional part is what i need to meditate on... it's what we ALL need, although it can't be forced upon you, except for by the cold, unfriendly part of life, that will either make people more cold themselves (quite unfortunate) or inspire some true, unconditional LOVE to melt the cold, mechanical nature of falling-in-line.

-LY5


--------------------
www.livephish.com
[url = www.absinthesupply.com]
[url = www.sugarmegs.org]
url = www.ebaumsworld.com
= www.rpwebworks.com

"Never fail to stand up for what you believe in, there will always be  someone else who believes in something else."-Me :smirk:
To contact me via MSN messenger, guess my f^$ing contact name... you phsychic.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Jump to top. Pages: 1

General Interest >> Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* The Effects We Experience ThirdEyeSkewed 589 8 10/18/05 01:45 PM
by Gomp
* Authenticity of Carlos Cantaneda's Works
( 1 2 3 4 5 all )
Fospher 4,233 99 01/07/06 05:47 PM
by Corporal Kielbasa
* Pick the psychotic from religious and drug experiences enotake2 809 12 02/26/03 04:05 AM
by Grav
* Existentialism and "authenticity"...??? figmentfragment 520 2 03/30/09 05:09 AM
by MushroomTrip
* Christian Spiritual Experiences
( 1 2 all )
LordPeter 2,757 23 12/11/01 08:44 AM
by LOBO
* please interpret my "alien" experiance
( 1 2 all )
Anonymous 1,299 22 11/28/02 07:01 PM
by dumlovesyou
* whats the experience of one man meditating... lucid 1,584 16 10/10/03 11:54 AM
by lucid
* take part in a prayer experiment tonight!
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 all )
NiamhNyx 5,929 140 06/07/07 07:04 PM
by Icelander

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, CosmicJoke, Diploid, DividedQuantum
735 topic views. 0 members, 3 guests and 7 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Toggle Favorite | Print Topic | Stats ]
Search this thread:
Mushrooms.com
Please support our sponsors.

Copyright 1997-2016 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.095 seconds spending 0.004 seconds on 14 queries.