The "chinese Room" Argument: It's Not Thinking, It's Just an Algorithm
Posted3 months agoActive2 months ago
en.wikipedia.orgResearchstory
calmneutral
Debate
20/100
Artificial IntelligencePhilosophy of MindCognitive Science
Key topics
Artificial Intelligence
Philosophy of Mind
Cognitive Science
The 'Chinese Room' thought experiment challenges the notion of artificial intelligence truly 'thinking', sparking discussion on the nature of consciousness and algorithmic processing.
Snapshot generated from the HN discussion
Discussion Activity
Light discussionFirst comment
1h
Peak period
4
Day 1
Avg / period
2.5
Key moments
- 01Story posted
Oct 19, 2025 at 7:43 PM EDT
3 months ago
Step 01 - 02First comment
Oct 19, 2025 at 9:01 PM EDT
1h after posting
Step 02 - 03Peak activity
4 comments in Day 1
Hottest window of the conversation
Step 03 - 04Latest activity
Nov 1, 2025 at 5:53 PM EDT
2 months ago
Step 04
Generating AI Summary...
Analyzing up to 500 comments to identify key contributors and discussion patterns
ID: 45639004Type: storyLast synced: 11/17/2025, 9:06:02 AM
Want the full context?
Jump to the original sources
Read the primary article or dive into the live Hacker News thread when you're ready.
Your "entire" counter "argument relies on an assumption that thinking or consciousness is" nothing special, just an algorithm.
As to rigor, you can support your argument very simply by showing an algorithm generate consciousness. As to "thinking"... define it.
However, those that think consciousness is something special beyond an algorithm need not produce any evidence beyond consciousness itself, because they claim nothing more than a mystery and the admonition to be wary as ordinary mechanical behavior may be confused with the mystery of consciousness, e.g., the Chinese Room.
IOW, if you think consciousness is not mysterious, all you need is a theory (i.e., mechanical manifestation) and a demonstration!
The world awaits!