31.07.2015 Views

Steven Pinker -- How the Mind Works - Hampshire High Italian ...

Steven Pinker -- How the Mind Works - Hampshire High Italian ...

Steven Pinker -- How the Mind Works - Hampshire High Italian ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Thinking Machines 81in a chess-playing computer turns out, by a remarkable coincidence, tobe identical to <strong>the</strong> battlefield events in <strong>the</strong> Six-Day War (King's knight =Moshe Dayan, Rook to c7 = Israeli army captures <strong>the</strong> Golan Heights,and so on). Would <strong>the</strong> program be "about" <strong>the</strong> Six-Day War every bit asmuch as it is "about" <strong>the</strong> chess game? Suppose that someday we discoveredthat cats are not animals after all, but lifelike robots controlled fromMars. Any inference rule that computed "If it's a cat, <strong>the</strong>n it must be ananimal" would be inoperative. The inferential role of our mental symbolcat would have changed almost beyond recognition. But surely <strong>the</strong>meaning of cat would be unchanged: you'd still be thinking "cat" whenFelix <strong>the</strong> Robot slunk by. Score two points for <strong>the</strong> causal <strong>the</strong>ory.A third view is summarized by <strong>the</strong> television ad parody on SaturdayNight Live: You're both right—it's a floor wax and a dessert topping.Toge<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong> causal and inferential roles of a symbol determine what itrepresents. (On this view, Swampman's thoughts would be about mymo<strong>the</strong>r because he has a /wittre-oriented causal connection with her: hecan recognize her when he meets her.) Causal and inferential roles tendto be in sync because natural selection designed both our perceptual systemsand our inference modules to work accurately, most of <strong>the</strong> time, inthis world. Not all philosophers agree that causation plus inference plusnatural selection are enough to nail down a concept of "meaning" thatwould work perfectly in all worlds. ("Suppose Swampman has an identicaltwin on ano<strong>the</strong>r planet . . .") But if so, one might respond, so much <strong>the</strong>worse for that concept of meaning. Meaning might make sense only relativeto a device that was designed (by engineers or by natural selection) tofunction in a particular kind of world. In o<strong>the</strong>r worlds—Mars, Swampland,<strong>the</strong> Twilight Zone—all bets are off. Whe<strong>the</strong>r or not <strong>the</strong> causal-plusinferential<strong>the</strong>ory is completely philosopher-proof, it takes <strong>the</strong> mystery outof how a symbol in a mind or a machine can mean something.Ano<strong>the</strong>r sign that <strong>the</strong> computational <strong>the</strong>ory of mind is on <strong>the</strong> right trackis <strong>the</strong> existence of artificial intelligence: computers that perform humanlikeintellectual tasks. Any discount store can sell you a computer thatsurpasses a human's ability to calculate, store and retrieve facts, draftdrawings, check spelling, route mail, and set type. A well-stocked softwarehouse can sell you programs that play excellent chess and that rec-

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!