What Is The Morality And Utility Of Artificial Intelligence?

Throughout its history, artificial intelligence has always been a topic with much controversy. Should human intelligence be mimicked? If so, are there ethical bounds on what computers should be programmed to do? These are a couple of question that surround the artificial intelligence controversy. This paper will discuss the pros and cons of artificial intelligence so that you will be able to make an educated decision on the issue.

The use of computers has pervaded the life of every human being. At every street corner there are

Artificial intelligence (AI) is one of the most breath-taking topics in science and technology fields today. While the time frame of its real emergence has long been the focus of debates, the moral concern of such a practice is a more urgent question for the human race to answer. Authors and pundits from Mary Shelley in 1818 to Stephen Spielberg in 2001 have expressed their views on this problem already. British computer scientist Alan Turing was asked the question “can machines think?” half a decade ago, after

The Imitation Game made you think about if machines really can or cannot think. Alan was a brilliant mathematician and a very important person in World War II. He created a machine to break enigma so that the Allies could understand the messages the Nazi’s were sending out. In the movie there was a scene where Alan was being questioned about a paper he wrote titled “The Imitation Game.” Within the paper he is discussing if machines can or cannot think. Alan points out that the wrong question being asked is “can machines think?” Machines are different from humans, so they will think differently. Just like it is with two different people who do not think the same way. He created a machine that thought differently to break enigma, and it

“Can a machine made by intelligent minds have an intelligent mind of its own?” This was the question that was being asked in the 1950s. A man by the name of Alan Turing decided to venture out and analyze this question for himself by coming up with a thought experiment in which he called the imitation game. This is a game that involves three players. One of each gender and one who plays the judge to determine the gender of players A and B. A’s job is to try and trick C-the judge-into guessing the wrong gender. If C guess incorrectly, then A passes wins the game, or passes the Turing Test. Now, if we were to imagine a machine to replace A’s position in the game and now the judge has to figure out who is human and who is machine. If the machine

Through this piece of evidence it is established that even though the machines argue logically they cannot argue properly without warming up their brain plates. Their brain plates are not perfect though they call themselves superior to man. Though they are intelligent they will always be dependent on human intelligence because the humans are the ones that created them.

Two words that we all think we know fairly well are the words ‘artificial’ and ‘intelligence’. When asked, people will suggest that ‘artificial’ can be defined as fake, phony, not real, or made-up. When asked what ‘intelligence’ means, people will suggest the word being defined as smart, having knowledge, or being capable of certain or many tasks. Though when these words are brought together, it becomes unclear as to what these words mean, and what it means for something to be “artificially intelligent.”

Alan Turing is known to be the father of the modern computer, and the skewed depiction of his relationship between him and his machine in the “Imitation Game (2015)” displays as to why Alan Turing may have had a keen interest in the idea of a machine's ability to “obtain” human consciousness. Alan Turing develops, and presents his Turing Test in his article “Computing Machinery and Intelligence” that entails having three groups: one of them is the machine, the other is a human, and the last is a judge who will ask both groups a series of questions to where the judge will determine who is the human, and who is the machine (Warwick, Shah, 2015.)

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’.

Every year technology advances and one of the most questionable advancements is artificial intelligence. Artificial intelligence isn’t necessarily new but it has expanded greatly the past few years. I will first explain what artificial intelligence is and the Turing Test. Finally, I will discuss Turing and Searle’s views about the Turing Test and who has the stronger argument.

In attempting to answer the question of whether machines are able to think, Turing redesigns the question around the notion of machines’ effectiveness at mimicking human cognition. Turing proposes to gauge such effectiveness by a variation of an ‘imitation game,’ where a man and a woman are concealed from an interrogator who makes

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

People have had this fascination with technology long before there were any texts to write down history. While the technology that humans had a few thousand years ago were not as advanced as today, they were still toying with the idea of creating machines that would have the capability to make similar rational decisions that we do. As we are entering further into the technological age, it is becoming less of a far fetch idea and more of a possibility that artificial intelligence will reach the same capacity for thought that we have. Numerous scientists and scholars have disputed over whether or not if/when artificial intelligence gets to the point where their thought process is on par with a person, that they will be afforded the same

John Searle's thought experiment in paper “Minds, brains and programs” from 1980 is one of the most recognisable and broadly accredited critiques of artificial intelligence (AI) - an idea that computers are (or some day will be) able to think. Researchers in AI field often make a claim that our mental activity can be compared to a computer following a program. In such a view human brains do nothing more but simply process information on a massive scale. The most important question that Searle wants to discuss in his paper is: “ What psychological and philosophical significance should we attach to recent efforts at computer simulations of human cognitive capacities?” (p. 417) In order to tackle this idea he establishes two different types of

For centuries, philosophers have struggled to explain the nature of knowledge. Traditionally, we have considered our ability to think as the defining distinction between humanity and all other beings. However, the rise of the computer has created a great philosophical dilemma as we now struggle to reconcile the difference between the functioning of the human brain and the functioning of artificial intelligence. The purpose of my essay is to do exactly that – reconcile the difference by defending the argument that computers cannot think to the extent of biological human minds. I am in no way making a radical assumption that computers lack the ability to think at all, but there is a significant difference between concrete and abstract thinking which I will be referring to at a later time. I will make my argument against “strong artificial intelligence” by drawing on some ideas developed by philosopher John Searle. After arguing my premise for why computers cannot think, I will provide a criticism in relation to the flaw in my argument, which will be followed by my rebuttal to the criticism. This paper will close by defending my claims as to why computers cannot think, and why they will never be able to think to the extent of biological human minds.