feeling so chinese that when i talk about the chinese room thought experiment i just call it "the room"
Timeline
Post
Remote status
Context
16
@anemone what's your take on it? I very much agree with the traditional perspective, except that I think only humans can understand chinese because we have souls which is different from his milquetoast opinion that a sufficiently advanced computer could understand chinese.
@georgia@netzsphaere.xyz i dont think it actually addresses the question. the argument that the person running the algorithm or w/e doesn't understand is irrelevant since you could make the same argument that the individual cells making up the person dont understand chinese therefore the person doesn't understand chinese which is clearly a dumb position to take.
fwiw I currently lean on the side of consciousness not being something a computer can produce but i think computers can have souls since all things in the universe can have souls
fwiw I currently lean on the side of consciousness not being something a computer can produce but i think computers can have souls since all things in the universe can have souls
@anemone pretty sure he addresses your point and says its the unique configuration of a brains parts that allows it to understand chinese. like how he says the room with pipes and hydraulics made in the configuration of a brain can understand chinese. (I havent read the paper in a while I may be missing something) I do disagree that computers can have souls, although they may be possessed by spirits I guess. inert matter doesnt gain a soul because it is treated with a special process, only God can ensoul a being.
@georgia@netzsphaere.xyz there's no binary distinction between a living thing and inert matter
@anemone I mean there kinda is: is it a taxon of life? would say with the exception of prions and viruses its kinda black and white.
@georgia@netzsphaere.xyz its not black and white if there's an exception now is there? viruses are evolved from bacteria
@anemone hmmm I guess youre right but still, whatever has a soul is alive. and souls can only be given by God.
@georgia@netzsphaere.xyz what is alive though?
@anemone something that has a soul and thus transmigrates, its karma leading it to rebirth after rebirth until by grace it is liberated and returns to God
@georgia@netzsphaere.xyz seems a bit circular. "only living things have a soul" "what is alive?" "a thing that has a soul"
@anemone its hard to explain. especially since in truth there is neither living nor inert. all is pure consciousness (the mind of God)
@anemone but in samkhya prakriti is inert and purusha is sentient, the field and the knower of the field. and you can't make prakriti into purusha and vise versa, they are eternal coevolutes.
@georgia@netzsphaere.xyz how do you know one is one but not the other?
@anemone that is what vijnana is
@georgia@netzsphaere.xyz oh ok
@anemone sorry I should define terms, vijnana has a lot of definitions (being composed of vi which iirc can mean like a lot of something and jnana which means knowledge) but I prefer the definition that it is higher knowledge from realization (unlike scriptural knowledge) that the body and the Self (soul) are different. it is knowledge which discriminates prakriti from purusha, which removes the bonds of maya (illusion, ignorance, especially that of "I" [egoism] and "mine" [attachment to body, kin and possessions]).
Replies
0
No replies yet.