A short talk at psychology class about John Searle arguments (1980, 1990) and why computationalism may be failed.

1. The Death of Computationalism
杜國正
資訊工程學系
49521011

2. Computationalism
05/18/09 The Death of Computationalism 2

3. minds
Ⅱ
information-processing systems
05/18/09 The Death of Computationalism 3

4. information from world
(input)
↓
brain + mind
(hardware + program)
↓
mental state change, behavior, etc.
(output)
05/18/09 The Death of Computationalism 4

5. brain = hardware
mind = program
05/18/09 The Death of Computationalism 5

6. brain = hardware
mind = program
(?)
05/18/09 The Death of Computationalism 6

7. Chinese Room
[John Searle, 1980]
05/18/09 The Death of Computationalism 7

8. Chinese request
(input)
↓
a monolingual English-speaking man
+ a set of rules written in English
(hardware + program)
↓
Chinese response
(output)
05/18/09 The Death of Computationalism 8

9. Understanding?
05/18/09 The Death of Computationalism 9

10. He is a good guy.
05/18/09 The Death of Computationalism 10

11. He is a good guy.
→ (PropN.) + (V.) + Indet. + (Adj. + N)
→ NP + V. + (Indet. + NP)
→ NP + (V. + NP)
→ (NP + VP)
→S
05/18/09 The Death of Computationalism 11

12. Who is `he?'
How does `he' look?
He is a good guy.
What's the meaning of `good?'
Is there any hidden message?
05/18/09 The Death of Computationalism 12

13. Syntax ≠ Semantics
05/18/09 The Death of Computationalism 13

14. 05/18/09 The Death of Computationalism 14

15. 05/18/09
?
The Death of Computationalism 15

16. More formal version...
[John Searle, 1990]
05/18/09 The Death of Computationalism 16

17. 3 Axioms
05/18/09 The Death of Computationalism 17

18.  (A1) Programs are formal
 (A2) Minds have mental contents
 (A3) Syntax by itself is neither constitutive of
nor sufficient for semantics
05/18/09 The Death of Computationalism 18

19.  (A1) Programs are formal (syntactic)
 Have ability to manipulate symbols (using syntax)
 But don't know what they mean
05/18/09 The Death of Computationalism 19

20.  (A2) Minds have mental contents (semantics)
 Our thoughts have meanings
 They represent things and we know what are they
represent
05/18/09 The Death of Computationalism 20

21.  (A3) Syntax by itself is neither constitutive of
nor sufficient for semantics
 Already showed by Chinese Room thought exp.
05/18/09 The Death of Computationalism 21

22.  (A1) Programs are formal (syntactic)
 (A2) Minds have mental contents (semantics)
 (A3) Syntax by itself is neither constitutive of
nor sufficient for semantics
Leads conclusion
 (C1) Programs are neither constitutive of nor
sufficient for minds
05/18/09 The Death of Computationalism 22

23. Thus,
mind ≠ program
05/18/09 The Death of Computationalism 23

24. Given another axiom:
 (A4) Brains cause minds
 basic modern scientific consensus
05/18/09 The Death of Computationalism 24

25. Leads another conclusion:
 (C2) Any other system capable of causing
minds would have to have causal powers (at
least) equivlent to those of brains
05/18/09 The Death of Computationalism 25

26. Further:
 (C1) and (C2)
no programs can produce minds
“equivlent casual powers” produce minds
 → (C3)
programs do not have those powers
 → (C4)
brains do not use programs to produce minds
05/18/09 The Death of Computationalism 26

27. Thus,
brain ≠ hardware
… that uses programs to produce mind
05/18/09 The Death of Computationalism 27

28. References:
➔ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computationalism
➔ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitivism_(psychology)
➔ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_room
➔ http://www.iep.utm.edu/c/chineser.htm
05/18/09 The Death of Computationalism 28

29. The End
05/18/09 The Death of Computationalism 29