The Chinese Room Argument Analysis

As a novice programmer and a participant in Lego robotics I find the controversy surrounding artificial intelligence very intriguing. Programmers, computer scientists, and researchers alike have debated about the possibility of artificial intelligence becoming more intelligent than humans. Because I do have some knowledge of how computers work I can see why this topic is sparking so much interest. The thought of something that we created having the potential to surpass us is riveting. It’s impossible to fathom the idea that humans may lose their spot as the alphas of the world. In this paper I will break down the arguments surrounding this topic by putting them into simpler terms and prove why one side may be superior to the other.
Artificial
Strong artificial intelligence is the view that suitable programmed computers can understand language and possess the same mental capabilities as humans (Stanford). Weak artificial intelligence is the view that computers are only useful in some areas because they can mimic human mental abilities (Stanford). In 1980 John Searle published “The Chinese Room Argument” to prove that artificial intelligence appears to understand language but it actually does not understand. The argument is set in a scenario in which a computer follows a program written in the computing language. A human types Chinese symbols but does not actually understand Chinese and because the computer does what the human does it does not show understanding of Chinese either. The Turing test was created in 1950 by Alan Turing to deal with the question can machines think. It is also known as the Imitation Game and is comprised of a person, machine and interrogator. The interrogator is in a separate room from the person and the machine and the purpose of the game is for the interrogator to determine which one is the person and which is the machine. The person and the machine are labeled X and Y and the interrogator must ask them questions and the machine is trying to make the interrogator think that it is the person. “I believe that in about fifty years’ time it will be possible to program computers, with a storage capacity of about 109, to make them play the imitation game so well that an average interrogator will not have more than 70 percent chance of making the right identification after five minutes of questioning. I believe that at the end of the century the use of words and general educated opinion will have altered so much that one will be able to speak of machines thinking without expecting to be contradicted” said Turing (Stanford). The test may not be good because it only bases intelligence off of being able to