TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Chinese room argument

11 点作者 jermaink将近 8 年前

3 条评论

cousin_it将近 8 年前
For everyone who considers the Chinese Room argument obviously wrong (like me), here&#x27;s two versions that are much stronger and might still make you uneasy:<p>In Greg Egan&#x27;s &quot;Jewelhead&quot; stories, every person gets a computer implanted in their brain at birth, which gradually learns to imitate the input-output behavior of the biological brain. At some point they switch to the jewel full time and throw away the biological brain, becoming immortal. That&#x27;s seen as a fact of life and people don&#x27;t question it much.<p>In one of Wei Dai&#x27;s nightmare scenarios, we ask an AI to upload humans in an efficient way. Unfortunately, since humans can&#x27;t introspect into the idea of &quot;I&#x27;m conscious&quot; very deeply, the resulting resource-optimized uploads just have a handful of hardcoded responses to questions about consciousness, and aren&#x27;t in fact conscious. Nobody notices.<p>Of course, both cases are problematic only if you can &quot;optimize&quot; a human brain into something else, which would mimic the same input-output behavior without being conscious. The trouble is that we can&#x27;t rule out that possibility today. Humans certainly have a lot of neural circuitry that&#x27;s a side effect of something else. Some of it might get optimized out, the way a human in a sealed room can be optimized to nothing at all. To rule out a &quot;Disneyland without children&quot; scenario, wishful thinking isn&#x27;t enough, we need to properly figure out consciousness and qualia.
评论 #14698634 未加载
评论 #14698716 未加载
dTal将近 8 年前
The most famous example of an entire category of fallacious arguments about consciousness:<p><pre><code> 1) construct a hypothetical brain on an implausible substrate 2) note the implausibility of the substrate 3) therefore consciousness is magic QED </code></pre> See also: &quot;China brain&quot;
bwasti将近 8 年前
From the article, in &quot;Replies&quot;:<p>The fact that man does not understand Chinese is irrelevant, because it is only the system as a whole that matters. Searle notes that (in this simple version of the reply) the &quot;system&quot; is nothing more than a collection of ordinary physical objects; it grants the power of understanding and consciousness to &quot;the conjunction of that person and bits of paper&quot; without making any effort to explain how this pile of objects has become a conscious, thinking being. Searle argues that no reasonable person should be satisfied with the reply, unless they are &quot;under the grip of an ideology&quot;.
评论 #14698684 未加载