Comparing Visualizations of the Chinese Room
wolfram...@gmx.net
is better suited for illustrating the Chinese room thought experiment:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Chinese_Room2.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:ChineseRoom2009_CRset.jpg
I don't want to influence you, so I'll not state my opinion on this. A
simple Yea or Nay is sufficient, but if you feel like it, I'd like to
hear your reasoning.
Regards,
Wolfram
--
"A Paradox May Be Paradoctored."
Robert Anson Heinlein, All You Zombies, 1958
Curt Welch
> I'm currently involved in a discussion about which of these two images
> is better suited for illustrating the Chinese room thought experiment:
>
> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Chinese_Room2.jpg
I don't like the first becuase it's not even clear that paper the figure is
picking up came from under the door. It just looks like the guy is bending
over to pick up something and just happens to be next to a door.
And there are books of code to follow, no scrap paper, or penciles and
paper to record short term context on.
And even more important, no "out" slot.
> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:ChineseRoom2009_CRset.jpg
That's much better, but still lacking. No IN slot and no OUT slot, and no
desk to work out, nothing to write with.
> I don't want to influence you, so I'll not state my opinion on this. A
> simple Yea or Nay is sufficient, but if you feel like it, I'd like to
> hear your reasoning.
>
> Regards,
> Wolfram
Either are fine, but both seem highly lacking in my view. I would pick the
second if I had to choose, but I would prefer something that better showed
the process of someone receiving messages, writing new messages, and
sending them out.
I do prefer the cartoon format vs the picture becuase the cartoon can
better focus on the main issues, but in this case, the cartoon was just too
lacking to really indicate the process. I like the style of the cartoon,
but it's just missing a little to much to make it clear what it's
indicating.
If I were shown those two pictures, and asked what I thought they
represented, I would never, in a million years, think they had something to
do with the Chinese Room argument - and I think that says a lot about how
good either of them are.
A simple cartoon like this fits it better in my view (but is copyrighted so
it's not available)...
http://www.cartoonstock.com/newscartoons/cartoonists/mba/lowres/mban1424l.j
pg
--
Curt Welch http://CurtWelch.Com/
cu...@kcwc.com http://NewsReader.Com/
Curt Welch
Stupid me, I let the URL wrap! Lets try again....
http://www.cartoonstock.com/newscartoons/cartoonists/mba/lowres/mban1424l.jpg
or
casey
Neither are suitable. The second one fails in particular in that there
is only one person (neuron) doing the processing and thus would
have to have all the powers of a single brain.
JC
wolfram...@gmx.net
long time no see! ;)
Thank you for your comments. I will address them when a few others
have had the opportunity to comment.
On May 24, 3:07 am, c...@kcwc.com (Curt Welch) wrote:
> http://www.cartoonstock.com/newscartoons/cartoonists/mba/lowres/mban1...
> pg
Hehe, that reminds me of Hauser's illustration:
http://web.archive.org/web/20071210043312/http://members.aol.com/NeoNoetics/MindsBrainsPrograms.html
For the sake of comparison, here a list of visualizations I've found
so far, the first two obviously from the same source, probably a book:
http://www3.hku.hk/philodep/joelau/wiki/pmwiki.php?n=Main.TheChineseRoomArgument
http://subcortex.com/pictures/
almost at the bottom of the page
http://www.jimpryor.net/teaching/courses/mind/notes/searle.html
http://www.macrovu.com/CCTWeb/CCT4/CCTMap4OtherChinese.html
http://www.haslo.ch/blog/john-searles-chinese-room/
http://core.ecu.edu/phil/yalcinu/uylecturenotes.html
click on "The Turing Test and The Chinese Room (page 2)"
http://macorrellsmp.wordpress.com/searles-chinese-room-argument/
three pages with several panels each
two pages with flash animations
http://inquiry.ucsd.edu/Reviewer/flashComponents.php
http://www.mind.ilstu.edu/curriculum/searle_chinese_room/searle_chinese_room.php
Regards,
Wolfram
Curt Welch
> Hi Curt,
> long time no see! ;)
>
> Thank you for your comments. I will address them when a few others
> have had the opportunity to comment.
>
> > http://www.cartoonstock.com/newscartoons/cartoonists/mba/lowres/mban1..
>
> Hehe, that reminds me of Hauser's illustration:
>
> http://web.archive.org/web/20071210043312/http://members.aol.com/NeoNoeti
>
> For the sake of comparison, here a list of visualizations I've found
> so far, the first two obviously from the same source, probably a book:
>
> mA= rgument
> http://subcortex.com/pictures/
> almost at the bottom of the page
>
> http://www.jimpryor.net/teaching/courses/mind/notes/searle.html
>
> http://www.macrovu.com/CCTWeb/CCT4/CCTMap4OtherChinese.html
>
> http://www.haslo.ch/blog/john-searles-chinese-room/
>
> http://core.ecu.edu/phil/yalcinu/uylecturenotes.html
> click on "The Turing Test and The Chinese Room (page 2)"
>
> http://macorrellsmp.wordpress.com/searles-chinese-room-argument/
> three pages with several panels each
>
> two pages with flash animations
> http://inquiry.ucsd.edu/Reviewer/flashComponents.php
> http://www.mind.ilstu.edu/curriculum/searle_chinese_room/searle_chinese_r
>
> Regards,
> Wolfram
Yeah, lots of good illustrations.
Have to admit however, the first two you gave had more character and feel
to them than all the others even if they don't illustrate the process as
well.
wolfram...@gmx.net
> Neither are suitable. The second one fails in particular in that there
> is only one person (neuron) doing the processing and thus would
> have to have all the powers of a single brain.
Thank you, Casey. As with Curt, I will reply when more opinions have
come in.
Neil W Rickert
>For the sake of comparison, here a list of visualizations I've found
>so far, the first two obviously from the same source, probably a book:
>http://www.macrovu.com/CCTWeb/CCT4/CCTMap4OtherChinese.html
That's the one I prefer. I think it better than yours.
The thing that stands out in Searle's argument as the most
image-worthy, is the idea of bushel baskets full of symbols.
And that "macrovu.com" image has those.
wolfram...@gmx.net
> >http://www.macrovu.com/CCTWeb/CCT4/CCTMap4OtherChinese.html
>
> That's the one I prefer. I think it better than yours.
I would take it, but we're restricted to free images, and can only
choose between the two Commons images.
casey
> On May 24, 3:20 am, casey <jgkjca...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>
> > Neither are suitable. The second one fails in particular in that there
> > is only one person (neuron) doing the processing and thus would
> > have to have all the powers of a single brain.
>
> Thank you, Casey. As with Curt, I will reply when more opinions have
> come in.
>
> Regards,
> Wolfram
For some reason i remembered the Chinese room setup incorrectly
as having may people doing the translation. I would now say perhaps
the second image as it covers someone translating from one form
to the other according to a set of rules.
JC
wolfram...@gmx.net
> For some reason i remembered the Chinese room setup incorrectly
> as having may people doing the translation.
You're probably thinking of The Chinese Nation aka The chinese Gym.
wolfram...@gmx.net
> image-worthy, is the idea of bushel baskets full of symbols.
P.S.: Searle's original description talks of "batches". Is there a
later version using baskets?
http://web.archive.org/web/20071210043312/http://members.aol.com/NeoNoetics/MindsBrainsPrograms.html
Don Stockbauer
> On May 24, 8:21 am, casey <jgkjca...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>
> > For some reason i remembered the Chinese room setup incorrectly
> > as having may people doing the translation.
>
> You're probably thinking of The Chinese Nation aka The chinese Gym.
It seems to me that the fellow in the room would be (just about) the
world's most pathetic answerer of questions about a Chinese story, to
the point of "never" getting anything done. However, a person fluent
in Chinese would be an excellent answerer of questions concerning a
story in Chinese, for s/he has had a lifetime of tuning a 1E11 neuron
network to do that. So the point is the fellow in the room knows no
Chinese and gets nothing done. Thus s/he is not answering the
questions knowing no Chinese.
J.A. Legris
> On May 24, 5:47 am, Neil W Rickert <rickert...@cs.niu.edu> wrote:
>
> > >http://www.macrovu.com/CCTWeb/CCT4/CCTMap4OtherChinese.html
>
> > That's the one I prefer. I think it better than yours.
>
> I would take it, but we're restricted to free images, and can only
> choose between the two Commons images.
>
Then the second image is obviously better. Actually, it's pretty good
- it really captures the notion of the person in the room just
following the rules, oblivious to the content.
The first image is more appropriate for the Systems Reply, where the
guy has internalized everything except paper and pencil.
--
Joe
Tim Tyler
> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:ChineseRoom2009_CRset.jpg
They made a whole *movie* out of Searle's stupid Chinese room?!?
--
__________
|im |yler http://timtyler.org/ t...@tt1lock.org Remove lock to reply.
zzbu...@netscape.net
> I'm currently involved in a discussion about which of these two images
> is better suited for illustrating the Chinese room thought experiment:
>
> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Chinese_Room2.jpg
>
> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:ChineseRoom2009_CRset.jpg
>
> I don't want to influence you, so I'll not state my opinion on this. A
> simple Yea or Nay is sufficient, but if you feel like it, I'd like to
> hear your reasoning.
Number two. Since what Searle obiously doesn't understand about
either languages, arguments, machines, computers, philosophy, or
education is that
Digital Terrain Mapping, Digital Fiber Optics,,Laserdisks,
Holograms,
Self-Replicating Machines, The Breakup of AT&T, Cell Phones, USB,
XML,
On-Line Publishing, and Self-Assembling Robots, were all invented
mostly
because The Chinese Language is mostly Caligraphy, rather than a
langiage.
wolfram...@gmx.net
> It seems to me that the fellow in the room would be (just about) the
> world's most pathetic answerer of questions about a Chinese story, to
> the point of "never" getting anything done. However, a person fluent
> in Chinese would be an excellent answerer of questions concerning a
> story in Chinese, for s/he has had a lifetime of tuning a 1E11 neuron
> network to do that. So the point is the fellow in the room knows no
> Chinese and gets nothing done. Thus s/he is not answering the
> questions knowing no Chinese.
Thank you, but we're not discussing the Chinese room argument here,
we're trying to get opinions on which of the two images in the first
post serves better for visualizing Searle's Chinese room.
wolfram...@gmx.net
> wolfram.schm...@gmx.net wrote:
> >http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:ChineseRoom2009_CRset.jpg
> They made a whole *movie* out of Searle's stupid Chinese room?!?
Yup, that's right:
Actually, I look forward to watching it. According to the director,
the entire movie was inspired by noting that aspects of his life
resembled being a Chinese room. It's not yet in distribution, so this
page and the festival site are currently the only online sources. And
the image, of course.
zzbu...@netscape.net
wrote:
> On May 23, 6:53 pm, wolfram.schm...@gmx.net wrote:
>
> > I'm currently involved in a discussion about which of these two images
> > is better suited for illustrating the Chinese room thought experiment:
>
> >http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Chinese_Room2.jpg
>
> >http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:ChineseRoom2009_CRset.jpg
>
> > I don't want to influence you, so I'll not state my opinion on this. A
> > simple Yea or Nay is sufficient, but if you feel like it, I'd like to
> > hear your reasoning.
>
> Number two. Since what Searle obiously doesn't understand about
> either languages, arguments, machines, computers, philosophy, or
> education is that
> Digital Terrain Mapping, Digital Fiber Optics,,Laserdisks,
> Holograms,
> Self-Replicating Machines, The Breakup of AT&T, Cell Phones, USB,
> XML,
> On-Line Publishing, and Self-Assembling Robots, were all invented
> mostly
> because The Chinese Language is mostly Caligraphy, rather than a
> langiage.
The counterpoint to that is people like Dennet are the standard
science cranks:
"If it ain't evolution, it ain't science."
.
>
>
>
>
>
> > Regards,
> > Wolfram
>
> > --
> > "A Paradox May Be Paradoctored."
> > Robert Anson Heinlein, All You Zombies, 1958- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Don Stockbauer
> On May 24, 2:49 pm, Don Stockbauer <donstockba...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > It seems to me that the fellow in the room would be (just about) the
> > world's most pathetic answerer of questions about a Chinese story, to
> > the point of "never" getting anything done. However, a person fluent
> > in Chinese would be an excellent answerer of questions concerning a
> > story in Chinese, for s/he has had a lifetime of tuning a 1E11 neuron
> > network to do that. So the point is the fellow in the room knows no
> > Chinese and gets nothing done. Thus s/he is not answering the
> > questions knowing no Chinese.
>
> Thank you, but we're not discussing the Chinese room argument here,
> we're trying to get opinions on which of the two images in the first
> post serves better for visualizing Searle's Chinese room.
If the whole argument is bogus, then why are you wasting your time
trying to get opinions on which of the two images in the first post
serves better for visualizing Searle's Chinese room? Why not try to
figure out how many angels can dance on the head of a pin instead?
wolfram...@gmx.net
> Why not try to
> figure out how many angels can dance on the head of a pin instead?
I'm not in it for the acrobatics. One angel at a time is entirely
enough for _my_ pin.
Don Stockbauer
> On May 24, 10:05 pm, Don Stockbauer <donstockba...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Why not try to
> > figure out how many angels can dance on the head of a pin instead?
>
> I'm not in it for the acrobatics. One angel at a time is entirely
> enough for _my_ pin.
Glad you solved that one. QED on the HMACDOTHOAP puzzle.
J.A. Legris
The argument may be flawed but the conclusion stands. Call it a null
hypothesis.
--
Joe
Don Stockbauer
It's the null hypothesis.
J.A. Legris
We're still talking about the CRA, right?
--
Joe
Don Stockbauer
No, I surrender, no use adding to the nearly infinite amount said
about it to date.
N
>
> - Show quoted text -
get lost, hehe!
J.A. Legris
I believe you may be the first person ever to concede a point in a
newsgroup. Bravo!
I suppose that makes me the first person to ever win one. Funny ... I
don't feel particularly victorious. No swelling of the chest. No
inclination to swagger. Nothing.
Can we find a way to disagree?
--
Joe
Don Stockbauer
Hi, Nicola. How's it going?
Don Stockbauer
I'm not conceding a point, I'm just jootsing from a potentially
infinite discussion
There's a country song where a guy gets most of his teeth knocked out
in a fight, loses an ear, eyes are swelled shut - but by golly, he's a
winner.
Can we find a way to disagree? Sure. I claim 2 + 2 = 5. You then
counterargue that "That's incorrect".
J.A. Legris
Damn!
It looks our options are limited to either potentially infinite
discussion, flat-out contradiction or complete agreement. I'll go for
door number 1.
I think the Searle is too timid. Yes, "syntax is not by itself
sufficient for, nor constitutive of, semantics.", but I would claim
also that syntax is not by itself sufficient for, nor constitutive of,
anything at all, at least nothing in this universe.
--
Joe
Don Stockbauer
I don't think there should be a syntax. Whoring around, drinking
booze, smoking cigarettes, etc should not be taxed. It's like the
Aggie who went into a Walgreens to buy a dozen prophylactics. The
clerk said, "That'll be $15.00, plus tax". "TAX??? I was going to
glue them on."
J.A. Legris
That one strains a little. Here's a good old one:
A woman is at the checkout counter in a grocery store and suddenly
remembers that she needs some tampons. It's pretty busy and noisy that
day so the cashier shouts to the stock boy, "HEY JIMMY, BRING A BOX OF
TAMPAX UP TO THE FRONT", but Jimmy hears "thumbtacks" instead of
Tampax. He shouts back, "DO YOU WANT THE KIND YOU PUSH IN OR HAMMER
IN?"
N
>
> - Show quoted text -
treat illustrational examples like they are somehow... like car
parking?
eg "cars are permitted in these lots between the hours of ...."blah
blah
so any found before or after the hours is liable for a fine ...or
perhaps
considerable debate...if the author gave specific details about what
is required, his intentions, then the illustrations must be as he
would
have envisioned them him or herself...anything over that would be
appropriate as long as the author has given their consent to it.
personally I would have several people all in their natural first
language
interpret and draw a card with the transcriptions to hand, at least
one
in either Arabic or Chinese?
Don I would even ask a porn star to give their interpretation of what
they
felt the author was trying to describe...(havnt you got one
anywhere ?).
those in theatre and those with a 'better than average' or 'higher
than
normal proximety' and intensity of one to one communication in skills
may be able to find out exactly where the door is, as to why it was
put
there maybe? and hinged
N
back, I was browsing through my Chinese dictionary and thinking on
photography and images, something or other to do with symbolic
processes? perceptual differences ..or at least how they might be
explained (language expressions I think it was) kind of started out
like making cross references between word orders?
Don Stockbauer
Slim and Rusty were on a cattle drive, and Rusty got caught short. He
went over to a bush and began peeing in it when a great big
rattlesnake struck and bit him right on the end of the - well, you
know what.
Rusty: "Slim, go into town quick and get the doctor."
Slim: "OK"
Slim finds the doctor who was delivering a baby and just couldn't
leave.
Doctor: "Slim, here's what you have to do. You have to make an
incision on the bite, and then you have to SUCK the poison out. You
have to SUCK and SUCK on it until there's no more poison."
Slim: "What's going to happen if I don't do that????"
Doctor "If you don't do that, my son, poor Rusty is gonna die."
Slim races back out to where Rusty is.
Rusty: "What did the doctor say, Slim, oh, what did he say???"
Slim: "The doctor said that you're gonna die."
(A heuristic: works best when told to heterosexuals).
Don Stockbauer
You once told me that you like to drink in the evenings and then post
to usenet. Is that why I can't ever make sense out of anything you
write?
wolfram...@gmx.net
discussion is at the English Wikipedia over which image to use for the
article on the Chinese room:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Chinese_room&oldid=292653770#New_image
Warning, most of the argument is about Wikipedia rules.
Curt, the frames on the walls are meant to represent the I/O slots.
The image is from a scene in which the main character visualizes the
room as he learns about it, so there is implied context lacking
outside of the film. A caption should correct this.
J. A., the idea of using the first one for the systems reply is
interesting.
Thanks to everyone who contributed, we shall meet again.
N
I can't be alone with that thought? lol ... if I were to illustrate my
impression of what the text suggested to me it would surely look like
a neural net, my obsevations and private thoughts about heirarchical
arrangements would fall into the 'subjective' of course, less than
accurate and pending the approval by those who have training and
familiarity with the principles, history and reasons behind the idea.
I think the idea is basically to remind people that there is an
obvious difference between machine translation and human
interpretation, and to promp the viewer into reflecting on their own
ways of comprehensioin and reasoning ability?
Don Stockbauer
Now that sounds reasonable,. I retract my nasty previous remark.
N
> Now that sounds reasonable,. I retract my nasty previous remark.- Hide quoted text -
>
ps...I was going to use that old fashioned word 'rational' yes? kind
of flaky around here, it goes along with the arm waving gestures
right, so I dropped it guessing it to be the 'synaesthetic node' in
some neural net... lol
Don Stockbauer
I'd go look that up but I'm too lazy.
Sounds like some kind of technical or scientific term.