Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Frankenstein mary shelley character analysis
Victor Frankenstein as a hero
Frankenstein mary shelley character analysis
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Frankenstein mary shelley character analysis
It has been said that God created man in His own image. Whether this statement is true or not has had no bearing on the desires of mankind to do as God supposedly did, and create a being in its likeness. Ancient Jewish legends tell stories of constructs, known as golems, that were made of worked dirt or mud and brought to life with magic, and would obey any command to the letter (Kopelman Foundation). As mankind turned from the arcane and began to embrace science, so too did the focus of such stories. However, the concept remained remarkably similar. A woman by the name of Mary Shelley wrote an almost universally famous novel by the title of . In it, she tells the tale of a young man named Doctor Victor Frankenstein who, obsessed with bringing the dead to life, creates a creature pieced together from human remains. It was, in essence, a golem made of flesh and animated through science and electricity. As time and science progressed, mankind’s thoughts shifted even further from the mystical and monstrous and more toward the technological. Robots emerged from the imagination of mankind, machines made of metal and synthetic materials built to resemble human beings and programmed to act and react, to think and learn for themselves, just as humans can. Half of this imagining is already a scientific fact. Automated robots fill America’s factories, and a humanoid robot, Honda’s ASIMO, is already able to run, jump, and otherwise navigate a normal human environment (American Honda Motor Co.). Still, one aspect of mankind’s dream remains in imagination: artificial intelligence. However, due to the work of Subrata Ghosh and his colleges, mankind may be just a few steps away from realizing its desire to create a thinking, evolving robot in i... ... middle of paper ... ...nformation. Vol. 5. 2014. PDF. 24 March 2014. . Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein. London: Henry Colburn and Richard Bentley, 1831. Skillings, Jonathan. Newsmaker: Getting machines to think like us. 3 July 2006. 18 March 2014. . Tank, David W. and John J. Hopfield. "Collective Computation in Neuronlike Circuits." Scientific American. 1987. PDF. 24 March 2014. . Turing, Alan. "Intelligent machinery." n.d. The Turing Digital Archive. Images of typed document. 1 April 2014. . —. "Intelligent machinery, a heretical theory." n.d. The Turing Digital Archive. Images of typed document. 17 March 2014. .
The purpose of this paper is to present John Searle’s Chinese room argument in which it challenges the notions of the computational paradigm, specifically the ability of intentionality. Then I will outline two of the commentaries following, the first by Bruce Bridgeman, which is in opposition to Searle and uses the super robot to exemplify his point. Then I will discuss John Eccles’ response, which entails a general agreement with Searle with a few objections to definitions and comparisons. My own argument will take a minimalist computational approach delineating understanding and its importance to the concepts of the computational paradigm.
In Frankenstein, Victor’s monster suffers much loneliness and pain at the hands of every human he meets, as he tries to be human like them. First, he is abandoned by his creator, the one person that should have accepted, helped, and guided him through the confusing world he found himself in. Next, he is shunned wherever he goes, often attacked and injured. Still, throughout these trials, the creature remains hopeful that he can eventually be accepted, and entertains virtuous and moral thoughts. However, when the creature takes another crushing blow, as a family he had thought to be very noble and honorable abandons him as well, his hopes are dashed. The monster then takes revenge on Victor, killing many of his loved ones, and on the humans who have hurt him. While exacting his revenge, the monster often feels guilty for his actions and tries to be better, but is then angered and provoked into committing more wrongdoings, feeling self-pity all the while. Finally, after Victor’s death, the monster returns to mourn the death of his creator, a death he directly caused, and speaks about his misery and shame. During his soliloquy, the monster shows that he has become a human being because he suffers from an inner conflict, in his case, between guilt and a need for sympathy and pity, as all humans do.
Frankenstien Many punishments for crimes are often given to innocent people. In the novel Frankenstein by Mary Shelly, there are several instances in which the punishment is given to an innocent person. Justine, a maid at the Frankenstein residence, was killed for a crime she did not commit. Felix, a character the Monster encounters, was exiled from his country, for helping an innocent man escape from jail. Lastly, Victor himself was jailed for a murder, which he did not commit.
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.
Do inanimate technologies think? Do they genuinely have a consciousness and real knowledge or are they simply machines? Are they made up of just algorithms and math medical equations? This is the argument many philosophers and scientists have been arguing over for years. John Searle, who is a professor at University of California, Berkeley, believes that not just Watson, but all higher-level information holding technologies do not have an active consciousness. They are only products of the human brain’s ideas and programs. Even though many esteemed mechanisms may demonstrate extraordinary knowledge even beyond human recognition, I agree with Searle. Computers do not have original thought. They are the result of high cognitive thinking
The Turing Machine is a simple kind of computer. It is limited to reading and writing symbols on a tape and moving the tape along to the left or right. The tape is marke...
Although the majority of people cannot imagine life without computers, they owe their gratitude toward an algorithm machine developed seventy to eighty years ago. Although the enormous size and primitive form of the object might appear completely unrelated to modern technology, its importance cannot be over-stated. Not only did the Turing Machine help the Allies win World War II, but it also laid the foundation for all computers that are in use today. The machine also helped its creator, Alan Turing, to design more advanced devices that still cause discussion and controversy today. The Turing Machine serves as a testament to the ingenuity of its creator, the potential of technology, and the glory of innovation.
Human beings have always been interested with the concept of artificial life and the construction of machines that look and behave like people. But nowhere is the concept of making a living thing out of spare parts more dramatic and exciting than in Mary Shelley’s famous story Dr.Frankenstein: The Modern Prometheus (1818). This story has been told and retold in various motion pictures and television shows throughout the twentieth century. Today, whenever people take the time to discuss and deduce the evolution of smart machines, their conversations usually include the possible rise of self-aware, intelligent robots that threaten to destroy their human masters.
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.
One of the things Alan Turing is known for is his creation of the concept of the Turing Machine. His ideas were presented in a paper, written in 1936. The Turing Machine is not a physical machine; it is a hypothetical mathematical tool and model. It was an idea of a computing device that could do any computation by performing a set of specified steps. A Turing Machine works by using a line of “tape,” which is made up of a line of squares called cells. Each cell has a symbol, character, or number written in it, called the input. The machine can also exist in various states, and it starts in the initial state. The machine goes over the tape and scans each cell. When it reads what is in the cell, it performs a function based off of the character in the cell, the state of the machine, and instructions programmed into the machine. The machine can either move to the next cell to the right of left, change what is in the current cell, or change states. The machines repeats until a certain signified condition is met. Because of it set-up, ...
[3] R.Rhodes, Visions Of Technology: A Century Of Vital Debate About Machines, Systems And The Human World. New York: Simon and Schuster.” 2000, pp.120-125
Alan Turing was a dedicated mathematician who devoted his lives works to developing computer knowledge, as we know it today. Alan was born in London, England on June 23, 1912. Alan soon began to attend a local school and his interest in the science fields arose. His teachers an others would try and make him concentrate on other fields such as History an English but his craving for knowledge of mathematics drove him the opposite way. Turing’s prosperous career in math started at King's College, Cambridge University in 1931. After graduation Alan moved on to Princeton University and that is where he explored his idea of a multi propose computer that used one’s and zero’s to describe the steps that needed to be done to solve a particular problem. His machine was later named the “Turning Machine”, which would read each of the steps and perform them in sequence, resulting in the proper answer. Turing had a vision of a computer that could do more than just a few tasks. Turing believed that an algorithm, which is a procedure for solving a mathematical problem in a finite number of steps that frequently involves repetition of an operation, or a step-by-step procedure for solving a problem or accomplishing an answer used by a computer. The hard part was finding what the little steps were a how to break down the larger problems.
Since the beginning of the first robots, man has always considered the possibility of machines taking over the world. This prospect is being explored by Kevin Warwick at the University Readings in England and his research suggests that robots could take over the world. According to his current research, robots have been able to learn and think creatively, though not as creative as a human. The relationship we have with robots is a master-slave relationship but this unusual idea of robots taking over the world would only occur if we would allow robots to be equal to us in stature and respect. However, it seems highly unlikely that robots would ever rise to the position to take over the world for two reasons. Firstly, Warwick’s idea only seems a possibility if robots have free will, therefore if we limit their capabilities they should not be in a position to take over the world. Secondly, robots would never reach the status of power to take over the world as the human workforce would resist to losing their jobs to machines.
‘Cybernetics, too, is a “theory of machines”, but it treats, not things but ways of behaving. It does not ask ‘what is this thing?’ but ‘what does it do?’ (Ashby, 1957: 1)
Copeland, BJ. 2005. Alan Turing's Automatic Computing Engine: The Master of Codebreaker's Struggle to Build The Modern Computer. Oxford University Press.