you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 0 points 5 days ago (7 children)

Wikipedia Chinese room. It's pretty airtight at the moment.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 4 days ago (2 children)

    This is not what the Chinese room is about.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 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.

  • source
  • parent