Two Dialogs on Searle
03/31/25 05:45 PM Filed in: Dialogs | Philosophy | Natural Theology | Computing | Artificial Intelligence
If a computer can beat you at chess,
it can beat you at philosophy.
The first dialog explores the fundamental mistake Searle makes in his "Chinese Room Argument", namely that while in the general case syntax is insufficient for semantics, programming languages are semantics with syntax. I have written about Searle before (the latest here), but that's me making a case to an empty courtroom. Here, I carry on an adversarial conversation with Grok 3.0 and let it judge the result.
The second dialog considers where Searle can maintain his conclusion that computers cannot be conscious without his "syntax is insufficient for semantics" pillar except by denying the Church-Turing Hypothesis, which he affirms. My position is that he can't, Grok tried to show he can.
Grok is overly verbose, yet sometimes exhibits what appears to be keen insight and sometimes says things in a way that make me jealous that it can be a better wordsmith than me. Grok doesn't get mad, doesn't get frustrated, and doesn't get tired (at least as long as I maintain my $30/month subscription). It is a far more challenging opponent than I typically have access to.
In the future, these discussions will be multi-way with humans and chatbots pushing the boundaries, with the machines keeping everyone honest - demanding definitions, uncovering tacit assumptions, noticing loops, and keeping score. We will be able to save a transcript then ask ChatGPT to read it and comment on it. New insights can be added, repetitious material ignored. The possibility of positive transform is exciting.
Dialog 1 - Searle's mistake
Dialog 2 - Searle and the Church-Turing Hypothesis