3
$\begingroup$

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"?

Improve this question
$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ Interesting question. However, the question in the title seems to be slightly different than the question in the body. Maybe clarify this! $\endgroup$
    – nbro
    Mar 11, 2020 at 19:04

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
1
$\begingroup$

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
$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ 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, 2020 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, 2020 at 12:48

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .