Soar is a cognitive architecture.

There is something called "the Chinese box" or "Chinese room" argument:

The "Chinese room" seems to be begging its question, but that is not what I am asking. I am asking if there is any literal difference between a tool like "SOAR" and the formalism of the "Chinese box". Is SOAR identical or equivalent to a "Chinese Box"?

  • $\begingroup$ Hi and welcome to AI SE! Nice provocative question(s)! However, the question in the title seems to be slightly different than the question in the body. Maybe clarify this! $\endgroup$ – nbro Mar 11 at 19:04

Searle's Chinese room is analogical and is intended to present an easy-to-understand picture of the essential elements and processes of the digital computer. In the room the man (CPU) has a book of intructions (program) for responding to Chinese input questions. That is just one program of many possible programs the room could run. Each different program would be a different instruction book. SOAR would be just one of those books.

| improve this answer | |
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, this seems reasonable, but I think you should say something about what SOAR is trying to do, i.e. is SOAR only manipulating symbols, etc.? I think this is the crux of the question. $\endgroup$ – nbro Mar 28 at 12:43
  • $\begingroup$ I can emulate the hardware of a computer, on a computer. In that emulation I can run a program. If I wanted to be a little recursive the program itself could be emulation, arguably of much simpler hardware. Together this system might comprise an inception-like box within a box within a box. Can I understand your answer to mean that any computer is the Chinese box, an anti-Turing? $\endgroup$ – EngrStudent Mar 30 at 12:48

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.