Zombie mouse in a Chinese Room

Download

Full text not archived in this repository.

Advice

Please see our End User Agreement.

It is advisable to refer to the publisher's version if you intend to cite from this work. See Guidance on citing.

Tools

Lists

Nasuto, S. J. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9414-9049, Bishop, J. M., Roesch, E. B. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8913-4173 and Spencer, M. (2015) Zombie mouse in a Chinese Room. Philosophy & Technology, 28 (2). pp. 209-223. ISSN 2210-5433 doi: 10.1007/s13347-014-0150-2

Abstract/Summary

John Searle’s Chinese Room Argument (CRA) purports to demonstrate that syntax is not sufficient for semantics, and, hence, because computation cannot yield understanding, the computational theory of mind, which equates the mind to an information processing system based on formal computations, fails. In this paper, we use the CRA, and the debate that emerged from it, to develop a philosophical critique of recent advances in robotics and neuroscience. We describe results from a body of work that contributes to blurring the divide between biological and artificial systems; so-called animats, autonomous robots that are controlled by biological neural tissue and what may be described as remote-controlled rodents, living animals endowed with augmented abilities provided by external controllers. We argue that, even though at first sight, these chimeric systems may seem to escape the CRA, on closer analysis, they do not. We conclude by discussing the role of the body–brain dynamics in the processes that give rise to genuine understanding of the world, in line with recent proposals from enactive cognitive science.

Altmetric Badge

Item Type	Article
URI	https://reading-clone.eprints-hosting.org/id/eprint/39814
Identification Number/DOI	10.1007/s13347-014-0150-2
Refereed	Yes
Divisions	Interdisciplinary Research Centres (IDRCs) > Centre for Integrative Neuroscience and Neurodynamics (CINN) Life Sciences > School of Biological Sciences > Department of Bio-Engineering
Uncontrolled Keywords	Animats, Chinese room argument, Bio-machine hybrids, Strong AI, Robotics
Publisher	Springer
Download/View statistics	View download statistics for this item

Deposit Details

Date Deposited:	07 Apr 2015 13:16	Date item deposited into CentAUR
Last Modified:	23 Jun 2024 02:54	Date item last modified

References

Berger, T. W., Hampson, R. E., Song, D., Goonawardena, A., Marmarelis, V. Z., & Deadwyler, S. A. (2011). A cortical neural prosthesis for restoring and enhancing memory. Journal of Neural Engineering, 8(4), 046,017. CrossRef Bishop, J. M. (2004). A view inside the Chinese room. Philosopher, 28(4), 47–51. Bishop, J. M. (2009). A cognitive computation fallacy? cognition, computations and panpsychism. Cognitive Computation, 1(3), 221–233. CrossRef Blake, W. (2000). Cochlear implants: principles and practices. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Boden, M. (1988). Escaping from the Chinese room. In M. Boden (Ed.), The philosophy of artificial intelligence (pp. 89–105). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Braitenberg, V. (1984). Vehicles: experiments in synthetic psychology. Cambridge: MIT Press. Bringsjord, S., & Noel, R. (2002). Real robots and the missing thought-experiment. In J. Preston & J. M. Bishop (Eds.), Views into the Chinese room: new essays on Searle and artificial intelligence (pp. 360–379). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Cariani, P. (2001). Symbols and dynamics in the brain. Bio Systems, 60(1–3), 59–83. CrossRef Cassirer, E. (1944). An essay on man. New Haven: Yale University Press. Cole, D. (2009). The Chinese room argument. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, winter 2009 edn. Stanford: Stanford University. Cosmelli, D., & Thompson, E. (2011). Embodiment or envatment? reflections on the bodily basis of consciousness. In J. Stewart, O. Gapenne, & E. di Paolo (Eds.), Enaction: towards a new paradigm for cognitive science. Cambridge: MIT Press. Dennett, D. (1991). Consciousness explained. Canada: The Penguin Press, Allen, Lane. Fins, J. J. (2004). Deep brain stimulation. In S. G. Post (Ed.), Encyclopedia of bioethics (3rd ed., Vol. 2, pp. 629–634). New York: MacMillan Reference. Fodor, J. A. (1975). The language of thought. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Fodor, J. A. (1987). Psychosemantics: the problem of meaning in the philosophy of mind. Cambridge: MIT Press. Fornos, A., Sommerhalder, J., & Pelizzone, M. (2011). Reading with a simulated 60-channel implant. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 5, 57. CrossRef Franklin, S. (1997). Artificial minds. Cambridge: MIT Press. Freeman, A. (2003). Output still not really convinced. The Times Higher Education. Freeman, A. (2004). The Chinese room comes of age: a review of Preston & Bishop. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 11(5–6), 156–158. Froese, T., & Ziemke, T. (2009). Enactive artificial intelligence: investigating the systemic organization of life and mind. Artificial Intelligence, 173(3–4), 466–500. CrossRef Garvey, J. (2003). A room with a view? The Philosophers Magazine, 23, 61–61. Gradinaru, V., Thompson, K. R., Zhang, F., Mogri, M., Kay, K., Schneider, M. B., et al. (2007). Targeting and readout strategies for fast optical neural control in vitro and in vivo. Journal of Neuroscience, 27(52), 14231–14238. CrossRef Harré, R., & Wang, H. (1999). Setting up a real ‘Chinese room’: an empirical replication of a famous thought experiment. Journal of Experimental & Theoretical Artificial Intelligence, 11(2), 153–154. CrossRef Haugeland, J. (2002). Syntax, semantics, physics. In J. Preston & M. Bishop (Eds.), Views into the Chinese room: new essays on Searle and artificial intelligence. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Horgan, T., & Tienson, J. (2002). The intentionality of phenomenology and the phenomenology of intentionality. In D. Chalmers (Ed.), Philosophy of mind: classical and contemporary readings (pp. 520–533). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Kringelbach, M. L., Jenkinson, N., Owen, S. L. F., & Aziz, T. Z. (2007). Translational principles of deep brain stimulation. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 8, 623–635. CrossRef Newell, A., & Simon, H. A. (1976). Computer science as empirical inquiry: symbols and search. Communications of the ACM, 19(3), 113–126. CrossRef Overill, J. (2004). Views into the Chinese room: new essays on Searle and artificial intelligence. Journal of Logic and Computation, 14(2), 325–326. CrossRef Pattee, H. H. (1995). Evolving self-reference: matter, symbols, and semantic closure. Communication and Cognition-Artificial Intelligence, 12(1–2), 9–27. Pfeifer, C., & Scheier, R. (Eds.). (2001). Understanding intelligence. Cambridge: MIT Press. Preston, J., & Bishop, J. M. (Eds.). (2002). Views into the Chinese room: new essays on Searle and artificial intelligence. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Putnam, H. (1988). Representation and reality. Cambridge: MIT Press. Rączaszek-Leonardi, J. (2012). Language as a system of replicable constraints. LAWS, LANGUAGE and LIFE pp 1–34. http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-007-5161-3_19. Rapaport, W. J. (2006). Review of Preston J & Bishop M, editors. Views into the Chinese room: New essays on Searle and artificial intelligence. Australian Journal of Philosophy, 94(1), 129–145. Rey, G. (2002). Searle’s misunderstanding of functionalism and strong ai. In J. Preston & J. M. Bishop (Eds.), Views into the Chinese room: new essays on Searle and artificial intelligence (pp. 360–379). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Richeimer, J. (2004). Review of Preston J and Bishop M, editors. Views into the Chinese room: new essays on Searle and artificial intelligence. Philosophical Books, 45(2), 162–167. CrossRef Roesch, E. B. (2014). A critical review of classical computational approaches to cognitive robotics: Case study for theories of cognition. In Z. Radman (Ed.), The hand: An organ of the mind. Cambridge: MIT Press. Schank, R. C., & Abelson, R. P. (1977). Scripts, plans, goals and understanding: an inquiry into human knowledge structures. Hillsdale: Erlbaum. Searle, J. (1980). Minds, brains, and programs. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3, 417–457. CrossRef Searle, J. (1992) The rediscovery of the mind. Cambridge: MIT Press. Spencer, M. C., Tanay, T., Roesch, E. B., Bishop, J. M., Nasuto, S. J. (2013). Abstract platforms of computation. In: AISB 2013. Exeter, UK. Sprevak, M. D. (2005). The Chinese carnival. Studies in the History & Philosophy of Science, 36, 203–209. CrossRef Talwar, S. K., Xu, S., Hawley, E., Weiss, S., Moxon, K., & Chapin, J. (2002). Rat navigation guided by remote control. Nature, 417, 37–38. CrossRef Warwick, K., Nasuto, S. J., Becerra, V. M., & Whalley, B. J. (2010a). Experiments with an in-vitro robot brain. In Y. Cai (Ed.), Instinctive computing, lecture notes in artificial intelligence (Vol. 5987). Dordrecht: Springer. Warwick, K., Xydas, D., Nasuto, S. J., Becerra, V. M., Hammond, M. W., Downes, J. H., et al. (2010b). Controlling a mobile robot with a biological brain. Defence Science Journal, 60(1), 5–14. Waskan, J. A. (2005). Review of Preston J and Bishop M, editors. Views into the Chinese room: new essays on Searle and artificial intelligence. Philosophical Review, 114(2), 277–282. CrossRef Wilson, S. W. (1985). Knowledge growth in an artificial animal. In J. J. Grefenstette (Ed.), First international conference on genetic algorithms and their applications (pp. 16–23). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Wittgenstein, L. (1958). Philosophical investigations. Oxford: Blackwell. Ziemke, T. (2001). Are robots embodied? In: C. Balkenius et al. (eds), Proceedings of the First International Workshop on epigenetic robotics: modelling cognitive development in robotic systems (vol. 85 pp. 75–83). Lund: Lund University Cognitive Studies. Zrenner, E. (2002). Will retinal implants restore vision? Science, 295, 1022–1025

University Staff: Request a correction | Centaur Editors: Update this record

Search Google Scholar