Last visit was: 25 Apr 2024, 01:04 It is currently 25 Apr 2024, 01:04

Close
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
SORT BY:
Kudos
Tags:
Difficulty: 555-605 Levelx   Long Passagex   Sciencex                           
Show Tags
Hide Tags
Intern
Intern
Joined: 07 Sep 2016
Posts: 23
Own Kudos [?]: 8 [0]
Given Kudos: 2
Send PM
Manager
Manager
Joined: 21 Jul 2014
Posts: 53
Own Kudos [?]: 42 [0]
Given Kudos: 95
GMAT Date: 07-30-2015
Send PM
Manager
Manager
Joined: 30 Jul 2014
Status:MBA Completed
Affiliations: IIM
Posts: 91
Own Kudos [?]: 97 [0]
Given Kudos: 107
Send PM
avatar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 25 Dec 2017
Posts: 4
Own Kudos [?]: 0 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: The idea of the brain as an information processor—a machine manipulati [#permalink]
For the 1st question i chose the option as D. Here Two contradictory statements are being discusssed and that is the reason why i chose that option.Can you please explain the correct answer
Current Student
Joined: 14 Nov 2016
Posts: 1174
Own Kudos [?]: 20709 [0]
Given Kudos: 926
Location: Malaysia
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
GMAT 1: 750 Q51 V40 (Online)
GPA: 3.53
Send PM
Re: The idea of the brain as an information processor—a machine manipulati [#permalink]
Vercules wrote:
The idea of the brain as an information processor—a machine manipulating blips of energy according to fathomable rules—has come to dominate neuroscience. However, one enemy of the brain-as-computer metaphor is John R. Searle, a philosopher who argues that since computers simply follow algorithms, they cannot deal with important aspects of human thought such as meaning and content. Computers are syntactic, rather than semantic, creatures. People, on the other hand, understand meaning because they have something Searle obscurely calls the causal powers of the brain.

Yet how would a brain work if not by reducing what it learns about the world to information—some kind of code that can be transmitted from neuron to neuron? What else could meaning and content be? If the code can be cracked, a computer should be able to simulate it, at least in principle. But even if a computer could simulate the workings of the mind, Searle would claim that the machine would not really be thinking; it would just be acting as if it were. His argument proceeds thus: if a computer were used to simulate a stomach, with the stomach's churnings faithfully reproduced on a video screen, the machine would not be digesting real food. It would just be blindly manipulating the symbols that generate the visual display.

Suppose, though, that a stomach were simulated using plastic tubes, a motor to do the churning, a supply of digestive juices, and a timing mechanism. If food went in one end of the device, what came out the other end would surely be digested food. Brains, unlike stomachs, are information processors, and if one information processor were made to simulate another information processor, it is hard to see how one and not the other could be said to think. Simulated thoughts and real thoughts are made of the same element: information. The representations of the world that humans carry around in their heads are already simulations. To accept Searle's argument, one would have to deny the most fundamental notion in psychology and neuroscience: that brains work by processing information.
1) The main purpose of the passage is to

A) propose an experiment
B) analyze a function
C) refute an argument
D) explain a contradiction
E) simulate a process




Passage: Searle

Question: Main Idea

The Simple Story


Most neuroscientists think of the brain as an information processor. The philosopher John Searle disagrees with this view, arguing that people can understand meaning and content, while computers cannot. The author, however, disagrees with Searle. She presents one of Searle’s arguments, related to simulated digestion, and refutes it. She then concludes that Searle’s argument is incompatible with a fundamental notion in psychology and neuroscience: that brains work by processing information.

Sample Passage Map

Here is one way to map this passage. (Note: abbreviate as desired!)

P1:

brain = info processor

Searle: computers can’t really think

Searle: human brain has ‘causal powers’

P2:

Author: brain = info processor

Searle: computer stomach not really digesting

→ computer brain not really thinking

P3:

Author: simulated stomach COULD really digest

Computer is the same, but with info

So: simulated thought = thought

Step 1: Identify the Question

The words main purpose in the question stem indicate that this is a Primary Purpose question.

Step 2: Find the Support

The support for a Primary Purpose question is found in the main point(s) of the passage as a whole, not in any specific detail. Briefly review your passage map to find the support for this question.

Step 3: Predict an Answer

The majority of the passage is spent refuting Searle’s argument. The author finally concludes that accepting Searle’s argument would mean denying the most fundamental notion in psychology and neuroscience. The primary purpose of this passage is to argue against Searle’s views.

Step 4: Eliminate and Find a Match

(A) The passage does propose an experiment (the simulated stomach), but it only does so in order to counter one of Searle’s arguments. The broader purpose, therefore, is to refute Searle’s views about human thought.

(B) The function mentioned here is presumably the information-processing function of the human brain. The passage doesn’t solely present its own analysis, however. Instead, it analyzes this function in order to refute Searle’s analysis.

(C) CORRECT. The passage first introduces, then refutes, Searle’s argument.

(D) The passage does not describe any of its ideas as a contradiction.

(E) The topic of the passage is, in part, the simulation of physical processes (digestion and thinking). However, the passage itself does not simulate these processes. Instead, it discusses some hypothetical simulations (without performing them), and disagrees with Searle’s view on what these simulations would imply.
Intern
Intern
Joined: 16 Dec 2017
Posts: 10
Own Kudos [?]: 8 [0]
Given Kudos: 4
Send PM
Re: The idea of the brain as an information processor—a machine manipulati [#permalink]
5/6 Correct.
Reading the passage 2:03
Question 1: 0:39 (Correct)
Question 2: 1:08 (Correct)
Question 3: 0:47 (Correct)
Question 4: 0:30 (Inorrect)
Question 5: 1:03 (Correct)
Question 6: 0:47 (Correct)

Total Time: 6:57

Anyways ,can anyone tell me the difficulty level of this passage? I think it was a 500-600.
Intern
Intern
Joined: 16 Dec 2017
Posts: 10
Own Kudos [?]: 8 [0]
Given Kudos: 4
Send PM
Re: The idea of the brain as an information processor—a machine manipulati [#permalink]
Transcendentalist wrote:
Vercules wrote:
The idea of the brain as an information processor—a machine manipulating blips of energy according to fathomable rules—has come to dominate neuroscience. However, one enemy of the brain-as-computer metaphor is John R. Searle, a philosopher who argues that since computers Simply follow algorithms, they cannot deal with important aspects of human thought such as meaning and content. Computers are syntactic, rather than semantic, creatures. People, on the other hand, understand meaning because they have something Searle obscurely calls the causal powers of the brain.

Yet how would a brain work if not by reducing what it learns about the world to information—some kind of code that can be transmitted from neuron to neuron? What else could meaning and content be? If the code can be cracked, a computer should be able to simulate it, at least in principle. But even if a computer could simulate the workings of the mind, Searle would claim that the machine would not really be thinking; it would just be acting as if it were. His argument proceeds thus: if a computer were used to simulate a stomach, with the stomach's churnings faithfully reproduced on a video screen, the machine would not be digesting real food. It would just be blindly manipulating the symbols that generate the visual display.

Suppose, though, that a stomach were simulated using plastic tubes, a motor to do the churning, a supply of digestive juices, and a timing mechanism. If food went in one end of the device, what came out the other end would surely be digested food. Brains, unlike stomachs, are information processors, and if one information processor were made to simulate another information processor, it is hard to see how one and not the other could be said to think. Simulated thoughts and real thoughts are made of the same element: information. The representations of the world that humans carry around in their heads are already simulations. To accept Searle's argument, one would have to deny the most fundamental notion in psychology and neuroscience: that brains work by processing information.


6) Which of the following most accurately represents Searle's criticism of the brain-as-computer metaphor, as that criticism is described in the passage?
A) The metaphor is not experimentally verifiable.
B) The metaphor does not take into account the unique powers of the brain.
C) The metaphor suggests that a brain's functions can be simulated as easily as those of a stomach.
D) The metaphor suggests that a computer can simulate the workings of the mind by using the codes of neural transmission.
E) The metaphor is unhelpful because both the brain and the computer process information.



Can someone help explain this one? I was stuck between A and E


A: The metaphor is not experimentally verifiable


In the passage Searle did not question the experimental authenticity of the metaphor. Hence Incorrect.

B. The metaphor does not take into account the unique powers

In the passage, the author states that Searle criticizes the metaphor because he thinks the brain powers cannot be simulated simply because it is complex and unique doe every being.

" Searle, a philosopher who argues that since computers Simply follow algorithms, they cannot deal with important aspects of human thought such as meaning and content. Computers are syntactic, rather than semantic, creatures. People, on the other hand, understand meaning because they have something Searle obscurely calls the causal powers of the brain." The words 'meaning' and 'content' are the unique abilities of the brain considered to be important by Searle, therefore he thinks that 'Brain as a computer' is wrong because it would underestimate the abilities of the human brains by comparing it to something inferior. Hence 'B' is Correct.

C. The metaphor suggests that a brain's functions can be simulated as easily as those of a stomach.

Irrelevant and Searle makes no such comparison. Incorrect.

D. The metaphor suggests that a computer can simulate the workings of the mind by using the codes of neural transmission.

This might seem like a good option at first but look at the metaphor 'Brain as a computer'. The metaphor is not suggesting the capabilities of a computer but underestimating the capabilities of a human brain which is Searle's main concern. 'D' is the opposite of the metaphor. Hence Incorrect.

E. The metaphor is unhelpful because both the brain and the computer process information.

This is the opposite of Searle's claim. In the last paragraph the author states "To accept Searle's argument, one would have to deny the most fundamental notion in psychology and neuroscience: that brains work by processing information" which means that Searle was of the view that brains do not work by processing information. Option 'E' states that Searle thought both computers and brains process information which is against the claim of Searle and the whole passage. Hence Incorrect.
Manager
Manager
Joined: 20 Jan 2016
Posts: 56
Own Kudos [?]: 61 [0]
Given Kudos: 68
Location: Canada
Schools: HBS '18
WE:Consulting (Other)
Send PM
Re: The idea of the brain as an information processor—a machine manipulati [#permalink]
yes3sir wrote:
5/6 Correct.
Reading the passage 2:03
Question 1: 0:39 (Correct)
Question 2: 1:08 (Correct)
Question 3: 0:47 (Correct)
Question 4: 0:30 (Inorrect)
Question 5: 1:03 (Correct)
Question 6: 0:47 (Correct)

Total Time: 6:57

Anyways ,can anyone tell me the difficulty level of this passage? I think it was a 500-600.


Ya I think so. I found it pretty straightforward compared with other passages that were tagged 700-level. Perhaps what makes it easy is that it does not use complex words or jargon and topic is one which all people are familiar with. There are definitely passages which are much more convoluted than this one.
Manager
Manager
Joined: 30 Sep 2017
Posts: 129
Own Kudos [?]: 122 [0]
Given Kudos: 658
GMAT 1: 710 Q48 V38
GPA: 3.8
Send PM
Re: The idea of the brain as an information processor—a machine manipulati [#permalink]
AD2GMAT wrote:
1) The main purpose of the passage is to
5) From the passage, it can be inferred that the author would agree with Searle on which of the following points?
A) Computers operate by following algorithms.
B) The human brain can never fully understand its own functions.
C) The comparison of the brain to a machine is overly simplistic.
D) The most accurate models of physical processes are computer simulations.
E) Human thought and computer-simulated thought involve similar processes of representation.

The correct answer option for this question is A - as provided by various forums.
I was not able to find the clear reason to reject the answer choice E - in this passage, so need your help - how to reject E and select A?
In the passage, I can see the line "John R. Searle, a philosopher who argues that since computers Simply follow algorithms," but where does the author agrees with this point?

Regards,
Akash


Hi,

I hope I can shed a light on the issue you have/had.

"John R. Searle, a philosopher who argues that since computers simply follow algorithms, <...>. <...> Brains, unlike stomachs, are information processors, and if one information processor were made to simulate another information processor, it is hard to see how one and not the other could be said to think."

From the above quoted sentences, I think it's reasonable to say that the second sentence is the one where the author 'nods' to Searl's idea. Computers and brains process information, simple as that. If the author thought that computers do not work the same way Searl thinks, he or she couldn't have countered the idea that computers and brain can equally perform the same thing. Thus the two can be deemed equivalent.

Perhaps this will help.
VP
VP
Joined: 09 Mar 2016
Posts: 1160
Own Kudos [?]: 1017 [0]
Given Kudos: 3851
Send PM
Re: The idea of the brain as an information processor—a machine manipulati [#permalink]
GMATNinja wrote:
This is indeed a tricky passage, so rather than trying to understanding every detail, make sure you first understand the purpose of each paragraph and then the purpose of the passage as a whole.


hi GMATNinja :-) hope you are having great weekend :) should we apply the above mentioned strategy to all RC passages ? :-)
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 17 Sep 2016
Posts: 440
Own Kudos [?]: 84 [0]
Given Kudos: 147
Send PM
Re: The idea of the brain as an information processor—a machine manipulati [#permalink]
Quote:
4) It can be inferred that the author of the passage believes that Searle's argument is flawed by its failure to

(A) distinguish between syntactic and semantic operations
(B) explain adequately how people, unlike computers, are able to understand meaning
(C) provide concrete examples illustrating its claims about thinking
(D) understand how computers use algorithms to process information
(E) decipher the code that is transmitted from neuron to neuron in the brain


dear experts, your approach to Q4 is great healful.
i picked up E, because i the author says : it is hard to see how one and not the other could be said to think.

please help
Manager
Manager
Joined: 17 Aug 2018
Status:Chartered Accountant
Posts: 51
Own Kudos [?]: 43 [0]
Given Kudos: 308
Location: India
WE:Accounting (Consulting)
Send PM
Re: The idea of the brain as an information processor—a machine manipulati [#permalink]
Can someone please explain Question No. 4 ??
Intern
Intern
Joined: 02 Dec 2018
Posts: 11
Own Kudos [?]: 8 [0]
Given Kudos: 162
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Economics
WE:Information Technology (Computer Software)
Send PM
Re: The idea of the brain as an information processor—a machine manipulati [#permalink]
Hello,

Can anyone describe how the answer to question 4 is B and not C ?
Current Student
Joined: 20 Oct 2018
Posts: 184
Own Kudos [?]: 127 [0]
Given Kudos: 57
Location: India
GMAT 1: 690 Q49 V34
GMAT 2: 740 Q50 V40
GPA: 4
Send PM
Re: The idea of the brain as an information processor—a machine manipulati [#permalink]
Rumsus wrote:
Hello,

Can anyone describe how the answer to question 4 is B and not C ?


Mapping specific statements in the passage:
"Yet how would a brain work if not by reducing what it learns about the world to information—some kind of code that can be transmitted from neuron to neuron? What else could meaning and content be? If the code can be cracked, a computer should be able to simulate it, at least in principle" - Author says that the brain works by breaking down the information, meaning and content, using specific steps = code. So, if we can decipher these steps, then we will be able to simulate the working of a brain using a computer. Then if this is the case, then why isn't the brain a machine. - Author is asking John Searle for explanation

"Brains, unlike stomachs, are information processors, and if one information processor were made to simulate another information processor, it is hard to see how one and not the other could be said to think. Simulated thoughts and real thoughts are made of the same element: information"
- Similarly in this case, the author is strengthening the case of brain being a machine.

In short author provides numerous cases in which we can call a brain a machine. And every time he seeks explanation from Searle's argument to understand why he is not consider the brain a machine.

Thus, in short, the author seeks explanation and not examples.

Hope the explanation helps!
Intern
Intern
Joined: 16 May 2019
Posts: 15
Own Kudos [?]: 2 [0]
Given Kudos: 52
Send PM
Re: The idea of the brain as an information processor—a machine manipulati [#permalink]
AD2GMAT wrote:
1) The main purpose of the passage is to
Paragraph 2 refers to the author's point that he is clearly opposing Searle's point
A) propose an experiment
<detail - incorrect>
B) analyze a function
<detail - it doesn't cover the entire paragraph - incorrect >
C) refute an argument
<the 2nd paragraph clearly refutes Searle's point - correct>
D) explain a contradiction
< passage does more than explaining the contradiction - understatement - incorrect >
E) simulate a process
<detail - incorrect >

2) Which of the following is most consistent with Searle's reasoning as presented in the passage?
Searle's reasoning is presented throughout the passage, so we need to verify details of each of the answer options.
A) Meaning and content cannot be reduced to algorithms.
<line "Searle would claim that the machine would not really be thinking" proves this answer choice - correct >
B) The process of digestion can be simulated mechanically, but not on a computer.
<out of scope, as second half of the answer choice has not been mentioned - incorrect >
C) Simulated thoughts and real thoughts are essentially similar because they are composed primarily of information.
<reverse of what Searle claims - incorrect >
D) A computer can use "causal powers" similar to those of the human brain when processing information.
<reverse of choice A - incorrect >
E) Computer simulations of the world can achieve the complexity of the brain's representations of the world.
<reverse of choice A - incorrect >

3) The author of the passage would be most likely to agree with which of the following statements about the simulation of organ functions?
Inference question type - we need to refer the para-2 and 3; we need to focus on the author's point not the S's point.
A) An artificial device that achieves the functions of the stomach could be considered a valid model of the stomach.
<line - "His argument proceeds thus: if a computer were used to simulate a stomach, with the stomach's churnings faithfully reproduced on a video screen, the machine would not be digesting real food." mentions the opposite view point of the author - hence inference is what this choice says - correct >
B) Computer simulations of the brain are best used to crack the brain's codes of meaning and content
<"best" is red flag; also there is no such correlation mentioned - incorrect >
C) Computer simulations of the brain challenge ideas that are fundamental to psychology and neuroscience.
<reverse of what the author says - incorrect>
D) Because the brain and the stomach both act as processors, they can best be simulated by mechanical devices.
<"best" is red flag; also there is no such correlation mentioned - incorrect >
E) The computer's limitations in simulating digestion suggest equal limitations in computer-simulated thinking.
<opposite of what the passage says - incorrect >

4) It can be inferred that the author of the passage believes that Searle's argument is flawed by its failure to
This inference question redirects us to go back to the area where author negates the Searle's point - "But even if a computer could simulate the workings of the mind, Searle would claim that the machine would not really be thinking;.................it is hard to see how one and not the other could be said to think."
A) distinguish between syntactic and semantic operations
<no such flaw is referred; wrong connection between the points - incorrect>
B) explain adequately how people, unlike computers, are able to understand meaning
<"able to understand meaning -> is same as -> thinking" ; rewording of the idea mentioned into the passage - correct >
C) provide concrete examples illustrating its claims about thinking
<might be a true reason of the failure of the argument but it is not highlighted or referred as a flaw by the author in the passage - incorrect >
D) understand how computers use algorithms to process information
<same reasons as for option C - incorrect >
E) decipher the code that is transmitted from neuron to neuron in the brain
<out of context - incorrect >

5) From the passage, it can be inferred that the author would agree with Searle on which of the following points?
A) Computers operate by following algorithms.
B) The human brain can never fully understand its own functions.
C) The comparison of the brain to a machine is overly simplistic.
D) The most accurate models of physical processes are computer simulations.
E) Human thought and computer-simulated thought involve similar processes of representation.

The correct answer option for this question is A - as provided by various forums.
I was not able to find the clear reason to reject the answer choice E - in this passage, so need your help - how to reject E and select A?
In the passage, I can see the line "John R. Searle, a philosopher who argues that since computers Simply follow algorithms," but where does the author agrees with this point?

-> I had same question and found it. Answer E is not correct since Searle did not think that human and compuarter simulated thought involve similar process. It is Author's point not Searle's. Thus couldn't be agreeded point.
6) Which of the following most accurately represents Searle's criticism of the brain-as-computer metaphor, as that criticism is described in the passage?
Question type seems - "why does Searle think that brain is not a computer?" Answer seems directly quoted in the line "However, one enemy of the brain-as-computer metaphor is John R. Searle, a philosopher who argues that since computers Simply follow algorithms, they cannot deal with important aspects of human thought such as meaning and content."
A) The metaphor is not experimentally verifiable.
<out of scope - incorrect >
B) The metaphor does not take into account the unique powers of the brain.
<paraphrase of the line mentioned above - correct >
C) The metaphor suggests that a brain's functions can be simulated as easily as those of a stomach.
<two far distant points are being correlated un-necessarily - incorrect >
D) The metaphor suggests that a computer can simulate the workings of the mind by using the codes of neural transmission.
<too much misaligned ; far-fetched inference - incorrect >
E) The metaphor is unhelpful because both the brain and the computer process information.
<not even related to what question asks - incorrect >

What do you say about the reasons that I have mentioned to reject answer options? And do you see a pattern of wrong answer options anywhere - please let me know.


Regards,
Akash
Manager
Manager
Joined: 07 Nov 2017
Posts: 61
Own Kudos [?]: 22 [0]
Given Kudos: 82
Send PM
Re: The idea of the brain as an information processor—a machine manipulati [#permalink]
Why can't (C) be the correct answer for the below question?
4) It can be inferred that the author of the passage believes that Searle's argument is flawed by its failure to
(C) - provide concrete examples illustrating its claims about thinking
In paragraph 3, the author raises the point that 'it is hard to see how can one and not the other said to think'. This comment by the author refers to the earlier claim made by Searle in the second paragraph 'the machine would not really be thinking; it would just be acting as if it were'. Thus it can be inferred that the author believes that had Searle provided more concrete examples around the claims about thinking, then the author wouldn't have said that 'it is hard to see one can and not the other said to think'.

Kindly help with my fault in reasoning.
Director
Director
Joined: 03 Mar 2017
Posts: 586
Own Kudos [?]: 418 [0]
Given Kudos: 596
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Technology
Send PM
Re: The idea of the brain as an information processor—a machine manipulati [#permalink]
MentorTutoring

Thanks for the revert on all my queries. Your explanations are really helpful.

I am stuck in between B and C in question#4 .

Searle's rejection is always based on one point. He says that computers cannot THINK like humans.

So why is C incorrect??

Option B on the other hand says that Searle is unable to explain adequately how people understand meaning.
But if you read the paragraph , we don't have any question raised on how people comprehend.

The question is always that computer cannot think like human.

So why B is correct??
Intern
Intern
Joined: 13 Jul 2017
Posts: 16
Own Kudos [?]: 7 [0]
Given Kudos: 106
Send PM
Re: The idea of the brain as an information processor—a machine manipulati [#permalink]
Not able to understand Question 5. How do we reject option "E" ?
Manager
Manager
Joined: 06 Jan 2017
Posts: 94
Own Kudos [?]: 108 [0]
Given Kudos: 283
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Finance
GPA: 3.33
Send PM
Re: The idea of the brain as an information processor—a machine manipulati [#permalink]
GMATNinja wrote:
rajatbanik wrote:
Hi I found this RC a bit difficult and I couldn't comprehend the second and the third paragraph. I would be grateful if anyone of you could explain the crux of this passage. I am lost among the details within the second and third paragraph. What did the author want to prove by using the stomach example?
Thank you.

This is indeed a tricky passage, so rather than trying to understanding every detail, make sure you first understand the purpose of each paragraph and then the purpose of the passage as a whole.

The main purpose of the first paragraph is to tell us that John R. Searle is an enemy (or critic) of the commonly accepted idea of the brain as an information processor.

In paragraph two, the author questions John R. Searle's position. The author then anticipates that Searle would respond to such questioning by citing the stomach example. So the purpose of the second paragraph is to explain why the author doubts Searle's position and then to describe an example that, hypothetically, Searle would use to defend himself when faced with the doubts posed by the author.

The purpose of the third paragraph is to explain why Searle's hypothetical stomach example is flawed. In other words, the author explains why Searle, when faced with the doubts posed by the author, would not be able to use the stomach example to adequately defend himself.

The final portion of the third paragraph summarizes the author's view, which is that "simulated thoughts and real thoughts are made of the same element: information" and that Searle's argument can only be accepted if one "denies the most fundamental notion in psychology and neuroscience: that brains work by processing information."

So the main purpose of the passage is to explain Searle's position and then to deny (or refute) that position.

I hope this helps!



GMATNinja

COuld you please explain why option A and not D is correct for question #3?

I realise that the use of best in option D is problematic - "Because the brain and the stomach both act as processors, they can best be simulated by mechanical devices." But is there any other issue with this option?

Further, it is not clear to me how are we arriving at option A.

Thanks,
Re: The idea of the brain as an information processor—a machine manipulati [#permalink]
GMATNinja wrote:
rajatbanik wrote:
Hi I found this RC a bit difficult and I couldn't comprehend the second and the third paragraph. I would be grateful if anyone of you could explain the crux of this passage. I am lost among the details within the second and third paragraph. What did the author want to prove by using the stomach example?
Thank you.

This is indeed a tricky passage, so rather than trying to understanding every detail, make sure you first understand the purpose of each paragraph and then the purpose of the passage as a whole.

The main purpose of the first paragraph is to tell us that John R. Searle is an enemy (or critic) of the commonly accepted idea of the brain as an information processor.

In paragraph two, the author questions John R. Searle's position. The author then anticipates that Searle would respond to such questioning by citing the stomach example. So the purpose of the second paragraph is to explain why the author doubts Searle's position and then to describe an example that, hypothetically, Searle would use to defend himself when faced with the doubts posed by the author.

The purpose of the third paragraph is to explain why Searle's hypothetical stomach example is flawed. In other words, the author explains why Searle, when faced with the doubts posed by the author, would not be able to use the stomach example to adequately defend himself.

The final portion of the third paragraph summarizes the author's view, which is that "simulated thoughts and real thoughts are made of the same element: information" and that Searle's argument can only be accepted if one "denies the most fundamental notion in psychology and neuroscience: that brains work by processing information."

So the main purpose of the passage is to explain Searle's position and then to deny (or refute) that position.

I hope this helps!

GMATNinja
Thank you sir for writing the sum up whole the passage.
can you check the highlighted part, please?
It's very hard to classify the author view and the other guys' view. How do someone convinced that which part posses by author and which part posses by other experts (e.g., scientist, economist, physicist, and so on)?
Quote:
Computers are syntactic, rather than semantic, creatures. People, on the other hand, understand meaning because they have something Searle obscurely calls the causal powers of the brain.

It seems that only this (quote) part is directly said by other guy, and the rest of the parts in the whole passage are pronounced by author. Am I missing anything?
Thanks__
GMAT Club Bot
Re: The idea of the brain as an information processor—a machine manipulati [#permalink]
   1   2   3   
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
6920 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
238 posts
GRE Forum Moderator
13958 posts

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne