K. Eric Drexler is known to be “the founding father of nanotechnology,” and theorized the creation of mechanical nanoscale systems that would revolutionize the world of manufacturing and technology. However, many opponents of his theory feared the implications and applications of such nanotechnology, and therefore began to spread panic through the concept of the menacing “grey goo.” “Prey” by Michael Crichton delves into the concepts Drexler proposed concerning nanorobotics computation and artificial intelligence through an interesting and insightful science fiction novel. Crichton delves in to the ethical implications of the unpredictability of evolutionary and machine learning programs, inability of technologists to learn from past mistakes, …show more content…
The “human sense of self control and purposefulness, is a user illusion,” therefore, if computational systems are comparable to human consciousness, it raises the questions of whether such artificial systems should be treated as humans. (261) Such programs are even capable of learning like children, with time and experience; the programs “[get] better at their jobs with experience,” however, many can argue the difference is self-awareness and that there are many organisms that can conduct such complex behavior but have no sense of identity. …show more content…
Therefore, the human organism although made of multiple “swarms,” is different from other organisms or programs because of the capacity to make conclusions and make illogical and “unnatural” decisions not based on the rudimentary interworking of the brain cells. Therefore although multi agent distributed parallel processing programs, can produce emergent behavior that could possibly be equated to our illogical decisions and creativity, human behavior, although somewhat emergent, stems from a deeper consciousness not generated by the interactions of brain
Andy Clark strongly argues for the theory that computers have the potential for being intelligent beings in his work “Mindware: Meat Machines.” The support Clark uses to defend his claims states the similar comparison of humans and machines using an array of symbols to perform functions. The main argument of his work can be interpreted as follows:
This book presents the relationship between human and animal behaviors and the behavior that is now created by our modern day society. The mind has two main parts. There is the conscious mind and the unconscious mind. The unconscious mind is the better half, yet it is potentially threatening; therefore, the conscious mind is aware at all times. The unconscious mind influences your behavior in many ways. Pi experiences both of these minds. Pi is consciously planning his survival and how he was going to spend his food, so he didn’t run out. His conscious mind contributed to Pi surviving at sea. Consequently, when Pi`s father fed a goat to a tiger to prove a point, he was unaware that this event changed his personality brutally. He became more
Did you know that today, 2.1 billion people – nearly 30% of the world's population – are either obese or overweight because they ate unhealthy food and didn’t exercise? After reading the Omnivore’s Dilemma by Michael Pollan, I have learned about all the opportunities right here in Rochester that have to do with eating more local food. We should eat more local food because it is healthier for us and it helps the environment.
The Chinese room argument certainly shows a distinction between a human mind and strong AI. However, it seems that the depths of human understanding can also be a weakness to how it compares to strong AI and the way that knowledge and understanding is derived.
Since antiquity the human mind has been intrigued by artificial intelligence hence, such rapid growth of computer science has raised many issues concerning the isolation of the human mind.
This world of artificial intelligence has the power to produce many questions and theories because we don’t understand something that isn’t possible. “How smart’s an AI, Case? Depends. Some aren’t much smarter than dogs. Pets. Cost a fortune anyway. The real smart ones are as smart as the Turing heat is willing to let ‘em get.” (Page 95) This shows that an artificial intelligence can be programmed to only do certain ...
The book I read was titled Prey. It was written by Michael Crichton, who has written many other knowledgeable books. This book is all based around the idea of human curiosity and carelessness. The book has an insert where Michael talks about how these concerns addressed in the book are concerns in real life. The book talks about how nanoparticles accidently let into the air caused some unexpected and deadly consequences. The topic of the book affects me because it gave me some insight on what it was like to deal with situations like that. Also, I hope it allows everyone who reads it to see that we need to be more careful and think of long term results instead of just short term fixes.
One of the hottest topics that modern science has been focusing on for a long time is the field of artificial intelligence, the study of intelligence in machines or, according to Minsky, “the science of making machines do things that would require intelligence if done by men”.(qtd in Copeland 1). Artificial Intelligence has a lot of applications and is used in many areas. “We often don’t notice it but AI is all around us. It is present in computer games, in the cruise control in our cars and the servers that route our email.” (BBC 1). Different goals have been set for the science of Artificial Intelligence, but according to Whitby the most mentioned idea about the goal of AI is provided by the Turing Test. This test is also called the imitation game, since it is basically a game in which a computer imitates a conversating human. In an analysis of the Turing Test I will focus on its features, its historical background and the evaluation of its validity and importance.
For years philosophers have enquired into the nature of the mind, and specifically the mysteries of intelligence and consciousness. (O’Brien 2017) One of these mysteries is how a material object, the brain, can produce thoughts and rational reasoning. The Computational Theory of Mind (CTM) was devised in response to this problem, and suggests that the brain is quite literally a computer, and that thinking is essentially computation. (BOOK) This idea was first theorised by philosopher Hilary Putnam, but was later developed by Jerry Fodor, and continues to be further investigated today as cognitive science, modern computers, and artificial intelligence continue to advance. [REF] Computer processing machines ‘think’ by recognising information
The cognitive revolution represents a diametric turn around in the century’s old treatment of mind and consciousness in science, such as the contents of conscious experience, whose subjective qualities were being discarded as mere causal epiphenomena (Sperry 1993). This paradigm shift brought with it alternative beliefs about the ultimate nature of things thereby bringing forth new answers to some of humanities deepest questions. The key assumption of cognitivism is that people have different mental states each of which can lead to a different response. The manipulation of these different states can be described in terms of algorithms all of which has become the defining paradigm of psychology (Sperry 1993)
Our intelligence, therefore, is our singular, collective ability to act and react in an everchanging world (1)
The traditional notion that seeks to compare human minds, with all its intricacies and biochemical functions, to that of artificially programmed digital computers, is self-defeating and it should be discredited in dialogs regarding the theory of artificial intelligence. This traditional notion is akin to comparing, in crude terms, cars and aeroplanes or ice cream and cream cheese. Human mental states are caused by various behaviours of elements in the brain, and these behaviours in are adjudged by the biochemical composition of our brains, which are responsible for our thoughts and functions. When we discuss mental states of systems it is important to distinguish between human brains and that of any natural or artificial organisms which is said to have central processing systems (i.e. brains of chimpanzees, microchips etc.). Although various similarities may exist between those systems in terms of functions and behaviourism, the intrinsic intentionality within those systems differ extensively. Although it may not be possible to prove that whether or not mental states exist at all in systems other than our own, in this paper I will strive to present arguments that a machine that computes and responds to inputs does indeed have a state of mind, but one that does not necessarily result in a form of mentality. This paper will discuss how the states and intentionality of digital computers are different from the states of human brains and yet they are indeed states of a mind resulting from various functions in their central processing systems.
When most people think of artificial intelligence they might think of a scene from I, Robot or from 2001: A Space Odyssey. They might think of robots that highly resemble humans start a revolution against humanity and suddenly, because of man’s creation, man is no longer the pinnacle of earth’s hierarchy of creatures. For this reason, it might scare people when I say that we already utilize artificial intelligence in every day society. While it might not be robots fighting to win their freedom to live, or a defense system that decides humanity is the greatest threat to the world, artificial intelligence already plays a big role in how business is conducted today.
From the first imaginative thought to manipulate nature to the development of complex astronomical concepts of space exploration, man continues to this day to innovate and invent products or methods that improve and enhance humankind. Though it has taken 150 million years to reach the present day, the intellectual journey was not gradual in a linear sense. If one were to plot significant events occurring throughout human existence, Mankind’s ability to construct new ideas follows a logarithmic path, and is rapidly approaching an asymptote, or technological singularity. This singularity event has scientists both supporting and rejecting the concept of an imaginative plateau; the largest topic discussed is Artificial Intelligence (A.I.). When this technological singularity is reached, it is hypothesized that man’s greatest creation, an artificial sapient being, will supersede human brain capacity.
Can mankind create intelligence? Can the dream of artificial intelligence ever be realized? Is it possible to formulate intelligence out of inorganic matter? In this paper, I intend to show that artificial intelligence is indeed attainable, that it is within the capacity of human intelligence to fashion intelligence out of non-living materials.