▲ 901 ▼ Cruel and abusive behavior (europe.pub) submitted 5 days ago by Maven@lemmy.zip to c/programmer_humor@programming.dev 186 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] story@lemmy.zip 0 points 5 days ago (7 children) Wikipedia Chinese room. It's pretty airtight at the moment. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] ricdeh@lemmy.world 4 points 4 days ago Not really. Chinese room has the conclusion pre-fabricated and tries to construct any sort of pseudo-scientific, fantastical philosophical dressing for some shred of legitimacy. It has absolutely no relation to the real world. permalink fedilink source parent [–] dudinax@programming.dev 4 points 4 days ago (5 children) Chinese room is not at all airtight. We don't know what it means to have emotions so we can't prove a Chinese room can't have emotions. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] PurpleClouds@lemmy.world 4 points 4 days ago (2 children) This is not what the Chinese room is about. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] dudinax@programming.dev 1 point 1 day ago (1 child) In this context the question is whether a Chinese room can suffer. We can't show a human isn't a Chinese room, humans can suffer so we can't show every Chinese room doesn't suffer. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] PurpleClouds@lemmy.world 1 point 1 day ago The Chinese room argument is about understanding, not emotions. There is a large body of literature on the use and evolutionary benefit of emotion. While you can make an analogy to see if a system can have emotions the link between understanding is not trivial. For example, animals show emotion but don’t have the same understanding that a human may have. I don’t think you need to have understanding to have emotions. So the Chinese room argument is shoe horned in without making it clear what your argument is. permalink fedilink source parent [–] story@lemmy.zip 1 point 4 days ago Emotions? i was confident that the Wikipedia article alone would grant you understanding, and for that, I have replicated the very situation I wanted you to learn about. This situation is my fault. permalink fedilink source parent [–] lagoon8622@sh.itjust.works -1 points 4 days ago We don't know what it means to have emotions We don't? That's news to me. Sorry for your loss, or happy for you, or whatever permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ricdeh@lemmy.world 4 points 4 days ago Not really. Chinese room has the conclusion pre-fabricated and tries to construct any sort of pseudo-scientific, fantastical philosophical dressing for some shred of legitimacy. It has absolutely no relation to the real world. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] dudinax@programming.dev 4 points 4 days ago (5 children) Chinese room is not at all airtight. We don't know what it means to have emotions so we can't prove a Chinese room can't have emotions. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] PurpleClouds@lemmy.world 4 points 4 days ago (2 children) This is not what the Chinese room is about. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] dudinax@programming.dev 1 point 1 day ago (1 child) In this context the question is whether a Chinese room can suffer. We can't show a human isn't a Chinese room, humans can suffer so we can't show every Chinese room doesn't suffer. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] PurpleClouds@lemmy.world 1 point 1 day ago The Chinese room argument is about understanding, not emotions. There is a large body of literature on the use and evolutionary benefit of emotion. While you can make an analogy to see if a system can have emotions the link between understanding is not trivial. For example, animals show emotion but don’t have the same understanding that a human may have. I don’t think you need to have understanding to have emotions. So the Chinese room argument is shoe horned in without making it clear what your argument is. permalink fedilink source parent [–] story@lemmy.zip 1 point 4 days ago Emotions? i was confident that the Wikipedia article alone would grant you understanding, and for that, I have replicated the very situation I wanted you to learn about. This situation is my fault. permalink fedilink source parent [–] lagoon8622@sh.itjust.works -1 points 4 days ago We don't know what it means to have emotions We don't? That's news to me. Sorry for your loss, or happy for you, or whatever permalink fedilink source parent
[–] PurpleClouds@lemmy.world 4 points 4 days ago (2 children) This is not what the Chinese room is about. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] dudinax@programming.dev 1 point 1 day ago (1 child) In this context the question is whether a Chinese room can suffer. We can't show a human isn't a Chinese room, humans can suffer so we can't show every Chinese room doesn't suffer. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] PurpleClouds@lemmy.world 1 point 1 day ago The Chinese room argument is about understanding, not emotions. There is a large body of literature on the use and evolutionary benefit of emotion. While you can make an analogy to see if a system can have emotions the link between understanding is not trivial. For example, animals show emotion but don’t have the same understanding that a human may have. I don’t think you need to have understanding to have emotions. So the Chinese room argument is shoe horned in without making it clear what your argument is. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] dudinax@programming.dev 1 point 1 day ago (1 child) In this context the question is whether a Chinese room can suffer. We can't show a human isn't a Chinese room, humans can suffer so we can't show every Chinese room doesn't suffer. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] PurpleClouds@lemmy.world 1 point 1 day ago The Chinese room argument is about understanding, not emotions. There is a large body of literature on the use and evolutionary benefit of emotion. While you can make an analogy to see if a system can have emotions the link between understanding is not trivial. For example, animals show emotion but don’t have the same understanding that a human may have. I don’t think you need to have understanding to have emotions. So the Chinese room argument is shoe horned in without making it clear what your argument is. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] PurpleClouds@lemmy.world 1 point 1 day ago The Chinese room argument is about understanding, not emotions. There is a large body of literature on the use and evolutionary benefit of emotion. While you can make an analogy to see if a system can have emotions the link between understanding is not trivial. For example, animals show emotion but don’t have the same understanding that a human may have. I don’t think you need to have understanding to have emotions. So the Chinese room argument is shoe horned in without making it clear what your argument is. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] story@lemmy.zip 1 point 4 days ago Emotions? i was confident that the Wikipedia article alone would grant you understanding, and for that, I have replicated the very situation I wanted you to learn about. This situation is my fault. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] lagoon8622@sh.itjust.works -1 points 4 days ago We don't know what it means to have emotions We don't? That's news to me. Sorry for your loss, or happy for you, or whatever permalink fedilink source parent