Chinese Room

Comments
http://zmhenkel-chi2010.blogspot.com/2011/01/chinese-room-blog.html?showComment=1295548113284#c957960979429859768

Reference
Minds, Brains, and Programs
John R. Searle

Summary
In this publication, Dr. Searle differentiates between strong and weak AI (Artificial Intelligence).  The concept of weak AI stems from the theory that a machine can be programmed with enough sophistication that it can mimic, but not attain, intelligence.  Strong AI, on the other hand, is the concept that a machine would not stop at mimicking intelligence, but could realize it.  The Chinese Room Argument is as follows: Searle imagines being in a room and being given sets of Chinese characters.  He must manually execute a program that simulates how a native Chinese speaker would act.  He doesn't understand a word of Chinese, but is able to create meaningful replies to the symbols by executing the program.  He argues that programs, even those that behave intelligently, are insufficient for actually behaving like a mind.  It may be able to solve a problem, but there is still a lack of understanding.  He argues that a machine could think, provided the machine is a brain or something with the same "casual powers."  Otherwise, it is just executing a series of instructions without real comprehension.
Discussion
In the Turing test, a person communicates with someone else by means of sliding communications under a door.  The individual does not know if a person or a machine is on the other side of the door.  Turing claims that if the tester is unable to determine if they are communicating with a machine or a person, then it has passed the test and can be called intelligent.  Searle, however, seems to be much stricter in his definition of intelligence.  In my view, weak AI is an inevitability.  It is only a matter of time before we can construct machines that act intelligent.  The real question is at what point does the crossover from weak to strong AI occur?  Does the burdon of proof lie on the machine, or will there be a predetermined set of guidelines to define intelligence?  I don't know the answer, but the moral and ethical implications could be severe.