#79 Consciousness and the Chinese Room [Special Edition] (CHOLLET, BISHOP, CHALMERS, BACH)

episode

Machine Learning Street Talk (MLST) not yet transcribed

▲ 0

Transcript

This episode hasn't been transcribed yet Upvotes decide what gets transcribed next — 0 so far. Sign in to upvote

More from Machine Learning Street Talk (MLST)

VAEs Are Energy-Based Models? [Dr. Jeff Beck] 46 min · 25 Jan 2026

Abstraction & Idealization: AI's Plato Problem [Mazviita Chirimuuta] 53 min · 23 Jan 2026

Why Every Brain Metaphor in History Has Been Wrong [SPECIAL EDITION] 42 min · 23 Jan 2026

Adversarial Examples and Data Modelling - Andrew Ilyas (MIT) 1h 28m · 22 Aug 2024

All episodes from Machine Learning Street Talk (MLST) →

Report any issue

Source

Recorded08 Nov 2022

Publisheranchor.fm ↗

Handlerec:2107429

Show notes

This video is demonetised on music copyright so we would appreciate support on our Patreon! https://www.patreon.com/mlst We would also appreciate it if you rated us on your podcast platform. YT: https://youtu.be/_KVAzAzO5HU Panel: Dr. Tim Scarfe, Dr. Keith Duggar Guests: Prof. J. Mark Bishop, Francois Chollet, Prof. David Chalmers, Dr. Joscha Bach, Prof. Karl Friston, Alexander Mattick, Sam Roffey The Chinese Room Argument was first proposed by philosopher John Searle in 1980. It is an argument against the possibility of artificial intelligence (AI) – that is, the idea that a machine could ever be truly intelligent, as opposed to just imitating intelligence. The argument goes like this: Imagine a room in which a person sits at a desk, with a book of rules in front of them. This person does not understand Chinese. Someone outside the room passes a piece of paper through a slot in the door. On this paper is a Chinese character. The person in the room consults the book of rules and, following these rules, writes down another Chinese character and passes it back out through the slot. To someone outside the room, it appears that the person in the room is engaging in a conversation in Chinese. In reality, they have no idea what they are doing – they are just following the rules in the book. The Chinese Room Argument is an argument against the idea that a machine could ever be truly intelligent. It is based on the idea that intelligence requires understanding, and that following rules is not the same as understanding. in this detailed investigation into the Chinese Room, Consciousness and Syntax vs Semantics, we interview luminaries J.Mark Bishop and Francois Chollet and use unreleased footage from our interviews with David Chalmers, Joscha Bach and Karl Friston. We also cover material from Walid Saba and interview Alex Mattick from Yannic's Discord. This is probably my favourite ever episode of MLST. I hope you enjoy it! With Keith Duggar. Note that we are using clips from our unreleased interviews from David Chalmers and Joscha Bach -- we will release those shows properly in the coming weeks. We apologise for delay releasing our backlog, we have been busy building a startup company in the background. TOC: [00:00:00] Kick off [00:00:46] Searle [00:05:09] Bishop introduces CRA [00:00:00] Stevan Hardad take on CRA [00:14:03] Francois Chollet dissects CRA [00:34:16] Chalmers on consciousness [00:36:27] Joscha Bach on consciousness [00:42:01] Bishop introduction [00:51:51] Karl Friston on consciousness [00:55:19] Bishop on consciousness and comments on Chalmers [01:21:37] Private language games (including clip with Sam Roffey) [01:27:27] Dr. Walid Saba on the chinese room (gofai/systematicity take) [00:34:36] Bishop: on agency / teleology [01:36:38] Bishop: back to CRA [01:40:53] Noam Chomsky on mysteries [01:45:56] Eric Curiel on math does not represent [01:48:14] Alexander Mattick on syntax vs semantics Thanks to: Mark MC on Discord for stimulating conversation, Alexander Mattick, Dr. Keith Duggar, Sam Roffey. Sam's YouTube channel is https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCjRNMsglFYFwNsnOWIOgt1Q

Ask this episode

“What did the council decide on item 42?” — answered with the speaker and the moment.