Abstract
Considerations of personal identity bear on John Searle's Chinese Room argument, and on the opposed position that a computer itself could really understand a natural language. In this paper I develop the notion of a virtual person, modelled on the concept of virtual machines familiar in computer science. I show how Searle's argument, and J. Maloney's attempt to defend it, fail. I conclude that Searle is correct in holding that no digital machine could understand language, but wrong in holding that artificial minds are impossible: minds and persons are not the same as the machines, biological or electronic, that realize them.
Original language | English (US) |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 399-417 |
Number of pages | 19 |
Journal | Synthese |
Volume | 88 |
Issue number | 3 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - Sep 1991 |