Can Machines Think Or Not?

In a guest column, Computers vs. Brains on the Opinionator of The New York Times, Sandra Aamodt and Sam Wang analyzed some of the arguments by inventor Raymond Kurzweil, one of the leading inventors of our time, in his most recent futurist manifesto: “The Singularity Is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology” (2005). Kurzweil estimates that machines will inevitably be able to surpass our thinking capabilities within a few decades. Kurzweil's speculative reasoning has been heavily debated and challenged. In Aamodt and Wang's article they point out that there are fundamental differences between our brains and computers that makes Kurzweil's predictions improbable. The purpose of this essay is to evaluate the arguments of sides, Kurzweil's book

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

Intense developmental stages in technology have brought us into a place we never thought we would be in, where instances of computers can function correspondingly to us humans. These machines can perform acts such as playing chess and sorting mail, which are actions that most of us have done before. Both William G. Lycan and John R. Serle assess this topic, using different thought experiments, but both introduce the term Artificial Intelligence. Both philosopher’s objectives are not to argue whether this is possible but how will we distinguish humans from computers.

Artificial intelligence (AI) has made a major impact in current day technology. Scientists need the help of AI to solve mysteries or problems that cannot be solved with only human intelligence. Machine and software can formulate answers almost instantaneously that could possibly take scientists days, months, or even years to solve. AI is like a helping hand for humans. In the article “Call Them Artificial Aliens” by Kevin Kelly, Kelly states that machines think differently from humans.

Alan Turing, as a Physicalist, saw the mind as the brain, since the brain is the physical object. Applying such views to machines, Turing’s Imitation Game ‘test’ is supposed to demonstrate his claim that certain machines should count as “thinking things” in the same way that we humans do. His argument being that, if a machine could imitate a human well enough to deceive a person that it was not a machine, then it should be considered “conscious.” He found that since most of what we base our foundation of consciousness on (our judgments and interactions with others), if we cannot see the responder in the game (i.e. the computer), and it responds as well as human, then it should also be considered a “thinking thing.” Turing also expected that one day machines would be able to imitate our minds so well, that we would not be able to tell the difference between a real mind or “thinking thing,” and a

At what point can we say a computer can think? The question was originally asked by Alan Turing in 1930’s, before the time of the modern computer. Turing believed that a computer’s intelligence should be judged against a human’s intelligence by giving both the machine and an intelligent student the same set of random, rapid-fire, questions, and seeing how the computer copes. If the computer’s answers are measurable with a human’s intelligence, then we have determined that the machine can in fact think. This was deemed the Turing Test, and since then, there have been countless arguments for and against it.

Living in the technology age has opened up doors for many different types of technology. Computers are very helpful to todays life because they assist you in memory and activity. This raises the question, can computers think. Turning believed that computers can think because he believes computers has the necessary general intelligent action to think. Searle argues against the idea saying “only a very special kinds of machines, namely brains” can think. I agree with Searle’s argument because computers don’t have brains, but are programmed to do what humans want it to do. I disagree with Turning’s argument because computers are specifically programmed by humans to do what we want them to do.

Erin Shoemaker B. Fullingim Composition 2 4 March 2018 The Argument from Consciousness Artificial intelligence is a way of defining intelligence of machines, in contrast to the intelligence of natural creatures like humans and animals. There are multiple theories explaining how machines and computers can think like humans. However, there are many logical objections to this, in which is still a question today. Not only that, if scientists can one day get computers to be as smart or smarter than humans, then what does that mean for the human race?

In this essay I will argue that digital computers are not capable of conscious thinking. First I will use Searle's argument to defend my view. I will then explain the features of consciousness that he talks about in order to use them against counterarguments.

It is obvious that the Turing test can be applied to computers from the arguments that he gave in response to the objections given in Computing Machinery and Intelligence. I will show that slight changes to these arguments can still allow passing, and will specifically demonstrate that these modified arguments support passing for cats and dogs. Turing’s idea of asking questions aimed to reveal mindedness, can be modified for pets; as mindedness is confirmed if and only if the interrogator is fooled into thinking that the pet is human too.

Alan Turing put this argument forward in his 1950 paper "Computing Machinery and Intelligence”. His opening pages of the paper begin with the words; "I propose to consider the question, 'Can machines think?” (Alan Turing 1950). My main argument to this is that a computer does not have the ability to think, primarily because it was created rather than ‘born and raised’.

In his paper “Computing Machinery and Intelligence,” Alan Turing sets out to answer the question of whether machines can think in the same humans can by conceptualizing the question in concrete terms. In simple terms, Turing redefines the question by posing whether a machine can replicate the cognition of a human being. Yet, some may object to the notion that Turing’s new question effectively captures the nature of machines’ capacity for thought or consciousness, such as John Searle. In his Chinese room thought experiment, Searle outlines a scenario that implies machines’ apparent replication of human cognition does not yield conscious understanding. While Searle’s Chinese thought experiment demonstrates how a Turing test is not sufficient to establish that a machine can possess consciousness or thought, this argument does not prove that machines are absolutely incapable of consciousness or thought. Rather, given the ongoing uncertainty of the debate regarding the intelligence of machines, there can be no means to confirm or disconfirm the conscious experience of machines as well as the consciousness of humans by extension of that principle.

Rene Descartes’ “Discourse on the Method” focuses on distinguishing the human rationale, apart from animals and robots. Wherein, he does so by explaining how neither animals, nor machines possess the same mental faculties as humans. For Descartes distinguishes the human rationale apart from non-humans, even though he does agree the two closely resemble each other because of their sense organs, and physical functions (Descartes, pp22). Nevertheless, it is because the mechanical lacks a necessary aspect of the mind, which consequently separates them from humans. For in Descartes “Discourse on the Method,” he argues that the noteworthy difference between humans, and the mechanical is that machines are only responding to the world through of their sense organs. Whereas humans possess the significant faculties of reasoning, which allows them to understand external inputs and information obtained from the surrounding environment. This significantly creates a dividing ‘line’, which separates humans from non-humans. For in this paper, I will firstly distinguish the differences between the human and mechanical’s mentality in regards to Descartes “Discourse on the Method”. Secondly, I will theorize a modern AI that could possess the concept of an intellectual mind, and then hypothesize a powerful AI that lacks the ability to understand its intelligence. Lastly, in disagreeing in why there are no such machines that is equivalent to the human mind. For humans don’t possess all the

In the future, we may be able to build a computer that is comparable to the human brain, but not until we truly understand one thing. Lewis Thomas talks about this in his essay, "Computers." He says, "It is in our collective behavior that we are most mysterious. We won't be able to construct machines like ourselves until we've understood this, and we're not even close" (Thomas 473). Thomas wrote this essay in 1974, and although we have made many technological advances