“Man is a robot with defects,” (Emile Cioran, The Trouble With Being Born). Humans' are not perfect, but we seem to strive for perfection, so who is to say that in the future robots will not out number the human race on Earth? In Star Trek: The Next Generation, the character Data is very much a robot and not human, being composed of inorganic materials but designed with a human appearance (an android), but does that make it just a robot? In the show it is proposed that for one to be a sentient being and a person they must possess three qualities, intelligence, self-awareness, and consciousness. In accordance to these three conditions it is obvious that the character Data is in fact a sentient being with the qualities of being a person.
To start off, to be classified as a sentient being, one must exhibit intelligence. To start off it is important to acknowledge what the definition of intelligence is; intelligence is the ability to acquire and apply knowledge and skills. Data is fully composed of inorganic parts such as circuit boards, wiring, metal, sensors and so on, it is easier to say that Data is a walking and talking computer. On the subject of intelligence it is easier to refer to Data as a computer to determine whether or not it is intelligent. The debate on whether computers are intelligent or not is well supported on both sides of the argument.
The position that computers are intelligent is supported by three points: refusing to say that computers are intelligent is prejudice towards computers, being intelligent does not mean that one must be knowledgable in all fields; being intelligent in a single area also proves to display intelligence, and there is no single qualification for intelligence; intelligence is measure...
... middle of paper ...
...erefore Data has consciousness.
In a nut shell, the character Data from Star Trek: The Next Generation is in fact a sentient being with the status of personhood. He has satisfied all of the conditions of being sentient person. Data is intelligent being with the capacity to learn and apply knowledge, he has self-awareness being aware of his desires, and finally Data is a conscious being able to acknowledge his existence and his own thoughts. Though Data is only a fictional android and the problem of determining a non-human's status of personhood has little to no application in our present day, in the not so distant future this may become a very serious debate with very genuine consequences.
Works Cited
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 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.
When watching the Star Trek episode I concluded that Data was a “person”. In the courtroom, Data revealed that he knows that he is fighting for his rights and possibly his life. I believe that Data should be considered a person because he is aware of what he is, what he is on trial for, and what the results of the trial would do to him. In addition, although Data has some oddities - i.e. super human strength - that humans do not have it was implied that he had an understanding of emotions. For example, it was shown that Data kept all of his medals and awards in a display case because he “wanted” them. When a person keeps accolade it is usually because they are proud of themselves for achieving a goal or that they want to be able to look back
The great philosopher Aristotle believed that humans had a fixed nature and should not be tampered with, although the 19th century philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre believed “existence precedes essence” which humans have their own freedom to choose to do what they wish. These two philosophical theories clash against one another about whether humans should alter our natural human nature and the issue of cyborgs. According to Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary a cyborgs is defined as “a person whose body contains mechanical or electrical devices and whose abilities are greater than the abilities or normal humans. Due to the increase in technology, today we are able to create artificial chips, organs, implants and other “life-like” body parts which can greatly enhance humans’ lives. The ethical debate that we have today is whether it is morally right to artificially implant object in humans and create cyborgs.
Nowadays technology allows us to upload all the memory of a dead person on the computer and create a robot. But can we say the robot is a person? Or can we say the person is still alive? The robot indeed has memory, even the personality of this person before he passes on. But robots and human are different, human have flesh and blood, robots, however, are made by metal. Although it is technologically achievable that robots can react respectively toward different feelings such as pain and itch, these reactions are artificial and they are not real “feelings”, metal would not feel the same way as skin feels.
If a machine passes the test, then it is clear that for many ordinary people it would be a sufficient reason to say that that is a thinking machine. And, in fact, since it is able to conversate with a human and to actually fool him and convince him that the machine is human, this would seem t...
... 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.
In Turing’s test, an isolated interrogator attempts to distinguish the identities between discreet human and computer subjects based upon their replies to a series of questions asked during the interrogation process. Questions are generally generated through the use of a keyboard and screen, thus communication can only be made through text-only channels. For example, a sample question would contain something along the lines of “What did you think about the weather this morning?” and adequate responses could include, “I do tend to like a nice foggy morning, as it adds a certain mystery” or rather “Not the best, expecting pirates to come out of the fog” or even “The weather is not nice at the moment, unless you like fog”. After a series of tests are performed, if the interrogator fails at identifying the subject more than 70 percent of the time, that subject is deemed intelligent. Simply put, the interrogator’s ability to declare the machine’s capability of intelligence directly correlates to the interrogator’s inability to distinguish between the two subjects.
Asimov’s robots can be described as clumsy, hard-working, cost-efficient, soulless, strong, fast, obedient, human-made, a cleaner better breed, more human than man.
Margaret Boden’s “Artificial Intelligence: Cannibal or Missionary” is a credible primary source article rebutting common concerns of artificial intelligence. Boden uses strong logic to combat against the thought of artificial intelligence making humans less special and artificial intelligence causing people to be dehumanized. Boden concludes that dehumanization and people finding themselves less special from AI are false and that other concerns include people overlying on AI.
...e and codes. With the continued advancement in computer technology, this entire argument though seemingly convincing, may in the future become a mute point. It is interesting that this argument has generated so much interest over the years. Undoubtedly, this argument is not with without fault yet, it still stands to substantiate beliefs that computers are not cognitively independent.
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...
Purdy, Ellen M. 2008. "The Increasing Role of Robots in National Security." Defense AT&L 37, no. 3: 26. MasterFILE Premier, EBSCOhost (accessed nov.1, 2011).
I don’t think there is any reason for these robots to have every ability that a human does. There is no way they are going to have the intelligence a human does. Artificial Intelligence is just going to bring more harm into our communities. We can’t trust the robots doing the “everyday” human activities, they are going to lead to unemployment, and will lead to laziness causing more obesity.