Hi there. I have a question about Searle's Chinese room argument. In it he seems

Hi there. I have a question about Searle's Chinese room argument. In it he seems

Hi there. I have a question about Searle's Chinese room argument. In it he seems to argue that purely syntactic programs are not sufficient for semantic content. From a biological perspective, I was wondering what if the program (genetic material) used the symbols themselves (proteins) to build a machine (a brain) that was capable of understanding meaning? What effect, if any, would this have on Searle's argument? I don't have any training in philosophy, so if you could pitch your answer with that in mind that would be great. Thanks, Tim

Read another response by Mark Sprevak
Read another response about Language, Mind
Print