Over several years, the improvement in technology has increased significantly..
Many people constantly ask what is the new and best technology but who is the one to make the final decision. Consumers are demanding for more but wanting less at the same time. “Companies are downsizing because technology now does a job that a person once did”(Oren, 2004). But is it appropriate to say that a human can be replaced by a computer? I believe that not all humans will be replaced by a computer, but I do think that a computer will be able to do many of the same things that a human can already do. John R. Searle and Alan Turing are two philosophers that I will be relating to in order to examine the likelihood of a computer being able to “think” or not “think” and I will look into how a computer and a human have more in common than what “humans” actually think. Also, with the help of the IBM computer, Watson, I will explain why I think that computers will be able to “think”.
Many people have a direct response to this question which is, what is the meaning of thinking? So I feel that it is appropriate to give my interpretation of what thinking is. To me, it means that something will be able to generate a thought, make a reasoning of something and analyze a specific scenario. I understand that not all computers are capable yet, but in time I believe it is more than possible to have a computer to be able to do those things. An example of this improvement is the IBM computer, Watson. Watson was previewed on Jeopardy, showing viewers what this computer is capable of. This computer that generates answers with every question it is asked, Watson would make his conclusion which could be classified that it is thinking. Watson played against human...
... middle of paper ...
..., David, "The Chinese Room Argument", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2009 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = .
Oppy, Graham and Dowe, David, "The Turing Test", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2011 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = .
Oren, Mike. Technology Can Byte My Arse. 2004. Article. URL = .
Searle, John. “Minds, Brains, and Programs,” in The Behavioural and Brain Sciences, 3. 3. Cambridge University Press., 1980. 417-457. Print.
Searle, John. The Myth of the Computer. New York: Basic Books, 1982. 3-5. Print.
“think”. Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary. 2008. .
This idea of a computer doing the ‘technical’ work can be useful to us, due to living in an age of technology which is something that can be useful to us, as our own brains are our ‘built in computer. It is also crucial in processing our thoughts about each of our own moral decisions of what is right and wrong.
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:
... in 21th century, and it might already dominate humans’ life. Jastrow predicted computer will be part of human society in the future, and Levy’s real life examples matched Jastrow’s prediction. The computer intelligence that Jastrow mentioned was about imitated human brain and reasoning mechanism. However, according to Levy, computer intelligence nowadays is about developing AI’s own reasoning pattern and handling complicated task from data sets and algorithms, which is nothing like human. From Levy’s view on today’s version of AI technology, Jastrow’s prediction about AI evolution is not going to happen. As computer intelligence does not aim to recreate a human brain, the whole idea of computer substitutes human does not exist. Also, Levy said it is irrelevant to fear AI may control human, as people in today’s society cannot live without computer intelligence.
Thinking is just the capability to understand and analyze everything around you and make you capable
In this paper I will evaluate and present A.M. Turing’s test for machine intelligence and describe how the test works. I will explain how the Turing test is a good way to answer if machines can think. I will also discuss Objection (4) the argument from Consciousness and Objection (6) Lady Lovelace’s Objection and how Turing responded to both of the objections. And lastly, I will give my opinion on about the Turing test and if the test is a good way to answer if a machine can think.
The conditions of the present scenario are as follows: a machine, Siri*, capable of passing the Turing test, is being insulted by a 10 year old boy, whose mother is questioning the appropriateness of punishing him for his behavior. We cannot answer the mother's question without speculating as to what A.M. Turing and John Searle, two 20th century philosophers whose views on artificial intelligence are starkly contrasting, would say about this predicament. Furthermore, we must provide fair and balanced consideration for both theorists’ viewpoints because, ultimately, neither side can be “correct” in this scenario. But before we compare hypothetical opinions, we must establish operant definitions for all parties involved. The characters in this scenario are the mother, referred to as Amy; the 10 year old boy, referred to as the Son; Turing and Searle; and Siri*, a machine that will be referred to as an “it,” to avoid an unintentional bias in favor of or against personhood. Now, to formulate plausible opinions that could emerge from Turing and Searle, we simply need to remember what tenants found their respective schools of thought and apply them logically to the given conditions of this scenario.
In this paper, I have attempted to concisely yet methodically explain the Turing Test and its respective objection and rebuttals. Both Turing and Searle’s comparisons between humans and computers in a methodological manner alike illustrate their opposing views on the topic. However, following Searle’s reasoning against Turing’s experiment, it is clear that he lacks adequacy for his reasoning. This is most commonly found in Searle’s tendency to base his theories off assumptions. In doing so, Turing’s ideal responses effortlessly undermine any substance Searle might have had, thus proving his to be the stronger theory.
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 Turing test was a test introduced by Alan Turing (1912-1954) and it involves having a human in one room and an artificial intelligence, otherwise known as a computer, in another and as well as an observer. Turing himself suggested that as long as the observer is unaware whether it’s a human or a computer in either room the computer should be regarded as having human-level intelligence. (Nunez, 2016). But does the “human-level” intelligence mean it should be considered to be conscious? Is it more important to be clever or to be aware of being clever? Is it moral to create a conscious being that just serves our purposes? Aside from the moral implications there are technical implications and parameters
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.
In order to see how artificial intelligence plays a role on today’s society, I believe it is important to dispel any misconceptions about what artificial intelligence is. Artificial intelligence has been defined many different ways, but the commonality between all of them is that artificial intelligence theory and development of computer systems that are able to perform tasks that would normally require a human intelligence such as decision making, visual recognition, or speech recognition. However, human intelligence is a very ambiguous term. I believe there are three main attributes an artificial intelligence system has that makes it representative of human intelligence (Source 1). The first is problem solving, the ability to look ahead several steps in the decision making process and being able to choose the best solution (Source 1). The second is the representation of knowledge (Source 1). While knowledge is usually gained through experience or education, intelligent agents could very well possibly have a different form of knowledge. Access to the internet, the la...
Well as I said we first must define ‘to think’. What does that mean? Webster’s New Compact Dictionary defines ‘think’ as "1. Have a mind. 2. Believe. 3. Employ the mind.". It defines mind as ‘to think’. So does this mean that if you can think does this mean you have a mind? My opinion is that, according to this definition, computers can think. A computer can give you an answer to the question ‘What is 4x13?’, so it can think. What’s that? You say it’s just programmed to do that, if no one programmed it wouldn’t be able to do that. Well how did you know how to answer the question? Your teacher or parent’s or someone taught it to you. So you were programmed, same as the computer was.
There has always been controversy as to whether computers hurt the way people think. Computers have hurt society more than it has helped. Although computers have benefits such as helping you for school work in making quicker decisions for you, and it makes it easier to do essays by using word; it has also hurt society because it makes us become lazier, makes online dating dangerous, and makes people addicted to the Internet.
Our minds have created many remarkable things, however the best invention we ever created is the computer. The computer has helped us in many ways by saving time, giving accurate and precise results, also in many other things. but that does not mean that we should rely on the computer to do everything we can work with the computer to help us improve and at the same time improve the computer too. A lot of people believe that robots will behave like humans someday and will be walking on the earth just like us. There should be a limit for everything so that our world would remain peaceful and stable. At the end, we control the computers and they should not control us.
In the past few decades we have seen how computers are becoming more and more advance, challenging the abilities of the human brain. We have seen computers doing complex assignments like launching of a rocket or analysis from outer space. But the human brain is responsible for, thought, feelings, creativity, and other qualities that make us humans. So the brain has to be more complex and more complete than any computer. Besides if the brain created the computer, the computer cannot be better than the brain. There are many differences between the human brain and the computer, for example, the capacity to learn new things. Even the most advance computer can never learn like a human does. While we might be able to install new information onto a computer it can never learn new material by itself. Also computers are limited to what they “learn”, depending on the memory left or space in the hard disk not like the human brain which is constantly learning everyday. Computers can neither make judgments on what they are “learning” or disagree with the new material. They must accept into their memory what it’s being programmed onto them. Besides everything that is found in a computer is based on what the human brain has acquired though experience.