Editing Chinese room (section)

==Searle's thought experiment==
Suppose that artificial intelligence research has succeeded in programming a computer to behave as if it understands Chinese. The machine accepts [[Chinese characters]] as input, carries out each instruction of the program step by step, and then produces Chinese characters as output. The machine does this so perfectly that no one can tell that they are communicating with a machine and not a hidden Chinese speaker.{{sfn|Searle|1980|p=11}}

The questions at issue are these: does the machine actually <em>understand</em> the conversation, or is it just <em>simulating</em> the ability to understand the conversation? Does the machine have a mind in exactly the same sense that people do, or is it just acting <em>as if</em> it had a mind?{{sfn|Searle|1980|p=11}}

Now suppose that Searle is in a room with an English version of the program, along with sufficient pencils, paper, erasers and filing cabinets. Chinese characters are slipped in under the door, he follows the program step-by-step, which eventually instructs him to slide other Chinese characters back out under the door. If the computer had passed the [[Turing test]] this way, it follows that Searle would do so as well, simply by running the program by hand.{{sfn|Searle|1980|p=11}}

Searle asserts that there is no essential difference between the roles of the computer and himself in the experiment. Each simply follows a program, step-by-step, producing behavior that makes them appear to understand. However, Searle would not be able to understand the conversation. Therefore, he argues, it follows that the computer would not be able to understand the conversation either.{{sfn|Searle|1980|p=11}}

Searle argues that, without "understanding" (or "[[intentionality]]"), we cannot describe what the machine is doing as "thinking" and, since it does not think, it does not have a "mind" in the normal sense of the word. Therefore, he concludes that the strong AI hypothesis is false: a computer running a program that simulates a mind would not have a mind in the same sense that human beings have a mind.{{sfn|Searle|1980|p=11}}