Philosophy Essay
Uploaded by
ScribdTranslationsPhilosophy Essay
Uploaded by
ScribdTranslationsCan machines have a mind and think like human beings?
typical?
Inês Simões Godinho
Portuguese School of Luanda
11th year of Philosophy
Class D
This essay discusses the problem of knowing whether machines will be able to
a mind and think like typical human beings. I will defend this
essay that it is very unlikely that machines will be equipped or
created by Strong Artificial Intelligence (AI).
First of all, I will define the concept of AI: AI is the area of
informatics whose objective is the application of knowledge of processes
human cognitive systems to the computer systems that reproduce them
processes. Two perspectives on AI can be distinguished:
1) The Strong AI (defended by Turing), that is, a computer
appropriately programmed, that passes the Turing test, will have
necessarily a mind.
2) Weak AI (defended by Searle), that is, a computer
appropriately programmed can simulate mental processes and
help us understand the mind, but that does not mean that it has
a mind, even if it passes the Turing test.
To try to determine if a machine is truly intelligent, the
Turing test, according to which a computer system to be tested and a
typical humans are interviewed separately, through a series of
questions and answers by a human interrogator. If in most of
cases, the interrogator fails to correctly identify the machine, it
will have passed the Turing test.
However, in response to the Turing test, Searle created the argument of
Chinese quarto in which it argues that a machine passing the test would be
just manipulating the symbols, without assigning any meaning to them. A
the machine would only be displaying syntactic properties (related to the
logical form) but not semantic properties, i.e., related to the
meaning of the symbols that are being used. So, a system
adequately programmed to manipulate only the syntax and not the
semantics does not meet all the necessary conditions to have a
mind just like that of a typical human being. So, if a machine passes
In the Turing test, we can say that it has weak AI, that is, it can simulate.
typical human mental processes but does not have a mind.
A common objection to the Chinese room argument is the objection of
System, which argues that although the person, in isolation, does not understand
Chinese, the system as a whole, understands.
Searle, in defense of his Chinese room argument, assumes that John
memorize all the elements of the system. Although knowing all the
rules, still does not know why it applies them, that is, still does not
understand Chinese and consequently the system does not either, because now the
the system is just another part of João.
Another common objection to the Chinese room argument is the Objection of
Robot. This objection assumes that a computer has been placed inside a
robot. It will interact with the world (walking, eating, ...). Secondly, the
critics, we can demand nothing more in terms of understanding than the
correct relationship between words and sentences with the outside world.
Once again, Searle will counter the robot objection by saying that
despite the interaction with the outside world by the robot, it does not have
notion of why one should react that way. The computer (or room
Chinese) is what makes it move. Now, since the QC/computer is what makes it
reacting like this, the computer does not have intentional states, such as beliefs and
wishes directed towards something, therefore, it cannot be endowed with an AI
Strong.
To create Strong AI systems, it is necessary, strictly speaking, to replicate the
the functioning of the human brain in a machine, not just the functions
rational but also the non-exclusively rational functions such as the
feelings, impulses or basic instincts. In my opinion, only
we could consider a machine endowed with a mind similar to that of
typical human when they are able to write sonnets or compose
concertos from their own emotions, ideas, and feelings. Now,
I consider this very unlikely because to this day no form is known.
someway to convert this not exclusively rational side into algorithms
of any kind.
In conclusion, it is highly unlikely that machines possess a mind.
and can think like typical humans, since they only
they manipulate symbols, not knowing their meanings and are not endowed
of functions that are not exclusively rational.
