"There was no theory of Chinese, no understanding. Just data. (If anyone ever wanted a disproof of Searle's riddle of the Chinese Room, here it is.)
Shouldn't this be a 'proof' instead of 'disproof'?
Shouldn't this be a 'proof' instead of 'disproof'?
(a) You can't prove or disprove a riddle
(b) The Chinese Room isn't a riddle, it's a thought experiment
(c) You can't prove or disprove a thought experiment
(d) You might be able to prove or disprove the point that Searle was trying to make by using the Chinese Room, except his point was about consciousness (or even Consciousness), not about machine translation, so ultimately the parenthetical statement seems to be pretty meaningless no matter whether you make it "proof" or "disproof"
Anyway, it's certainly not about machine translation.