Can Computers understand?
1) Thinking is the hallmark of understanding.
2) Only special machines can think.
3) If something can think it can understand.
4) Only special machines that can think can understand.
5) "Mental" states and their resulting actions are products of the center of activity (brain).
6) To understand, thoughts must be produced by the brain.
7) A computer's mental states and events are controlled by a program.
8) The program is not a product of the computer.
9) A computer does not produce "thoughts" in its brain.
10) A computer cannot understand.
John Searle addresses the point of the ability of Artificial
Intelligence (AI) to understand, in Mind Brains, and Programs. His main argument is that because AI's are computers and computers have no thoughts of their own, they cannot understand. Any actions being performed to simulate behavior are confined by the programs available to the computer. He presents the example of a man linking Chinese characters and appearing to know the language, but in reality the man is just following the instructions given to him
( the program). This example serves well to explain how although a computer can look like it understands a story, it can do no more than "go through the motions." Of course such a definitive standpoint on an issue as controversial as the capacity of an AI to understand will draw many critics. The criticism of his theory that I find to be the most credible is The Other Mind Reply offered by Yale University. This line of thinking asks: if behavior is what we can determine the presence of cognition through, and an AI passes a behavioral test, why don't we attribute cognition to it?
I myself do not believe in the philosophy of AI understanding, because to support either side on this issue one must have a belief for or against the
compromise of the two theories. There was also some debate over the power of the
I refrained from reading mainstream media news articles from sites such as the Huntington Post, Washington Post, CNN, FOX news, and others main stream media websites to protect myself from unintentionally becoming subject to bias that may have colored my findings. As such, it has taken quite a bit longer to uncover the factual evidence surrounding this controversy then originally planned, but it was important to me as well as many of you who have shown interest to present an unbiased, factually correct article. What you read here is from following information straight from the original sources themselves (which I link to) and reaching a conclusion based off of the factual evidence I found.
possibly be mistaken. He goes on to provide solid argument for his ideas. In Meditations
I will show that Kelly's response to the question of epistemic significance of peer disagreement is not compelling. In my explanation of Kelly's argument, I will show that it is contradictory of him to assert the first persons perspective and the right reasons view. I will then examine the third person perspective, and show that this is more compatible with the right reasons view. Nevertheless I will propose an objection in the form of a question. Specifically, why should the difference between first person and third person change my thinking skeptically? Would this view only be attractive from the third person view? The third person perspective, the right reasons view as Kelly explains it, plus what I will call external Validation of a belief makes a more compelling argument.
In about ½ of a page (single-spaced), please state whether you agree, disagree, or have a mixed opinion regarding the following statement and argue, via evidence and claims from what you have learned in class, why you have picked your stated position. Be sure to comprehensively explain and support your reasoning.
The first argument to be discussed is that of conceivability, which aims to disprove that the mind and
What is your position on this issue? Provide two or three reasons to support your argument
...r positions rather than basing their opinions on established science or law. It is every individual’s right to make a decision like the abortion of a child. It is their choice on not to bring a beautiful child into this world if they cannot afford to take care of the child, care for the child, and give the child the best possible life they deserve.
The issue of immigration must be dealt with rationally, not emotionally. Facts, figures, and statistics must be studied by both sides in order to reach a decision most beneficial to our nation. Our lives are enhanced by the new jobs created by immigrants, the social service funds bolstered by their tax payments, and the valuable technical skills and knowledge brought with them. These benefits far outweigh any negative effects and prove the value of immigrants as they pursue the American Dream in our "nation of immigrants."
In the opposite corner are those who believe that all illegal immigrants should be deported and the country’s borders made more secure. These individuals argue that allowing immigrants to enter the country illegally, letting t...
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.
When all the evidence is noted (and there is even more beyond that which is stated here), one can not ignore the overwhelming presence of a
... of nature. In fact, this belief, which does beg the question, is what predominates his thinking.
Do not believe in anyone theories without questioning it. It is important to prove that someone has the knowledge of what they speak.
Davis, Tom. The Theories of the Mind Lectures. Ed. G. Baston. Birmingham University. 9 Nov. 2000