I recently had to write a paper for my current philosophy class, and the last time I did a similar thread like this it went rather well, so here we go.
The following Essay belongs to me:
The Strong AI Thesis
With the escalation of modern technology, we have come to a point where digital computers have become exceptionally powerful and complex. We have even begun to develop technology that could be considered artificial intelligence or "AI".There are hyopthetically two different kinds of AI, The Weak AI , That which may only be considered to be simulating a mind, and the "Strong AI", that which may be considered to actually be a mind. The development of this technology has sparked a discussion on the possibilities of what these kinds of AI are capable of, and whether or not they can truly be considered "minds." The debate has been sparked by modern philosophers who question whether such a computer can actually think, or simply simulate thought, or intelligence. This essay will discuss the differences in opinions relating to this subject. Alan Turing developed a test called the Turing Test, a test which may be used to determine whether or not a computer can be truly be considered a "Strong AI; This test involves communication between a computer and a person, with a panel of judges overlooking the conversation and determining whether or not a computer or human being is involved." As of the time this essay was written, no computer has ever passed the Turing test. There is a man named John Searle who has deep doubts as to whether a computer is even capable of passing this test. Searle has devised an arguement known as "The Chinese Room" thought experiment, which challenges the very idea that a computer may be capable of truly being a mind.
John Searle's "Chinese Room" thought experiment demonstrates that an AI, developed through a digital computer can only follow specific programming protocols, and will follow strict guidelines when presented with a problem or question. The manner in which this computer develops a solution or response cannot be considered a "Strong AI" because it does not comprehend an actual question or problem in the same way a human mind does, but instead uses a type of "Search Engine" to determine an apropriate response to the presented problem. John Searle does not accept the idea that the Turing test is an acceptable model for determining whether a computer can truly have a mind, for two reasons; A group of judges, being part of the test, can be subject to personal bias, and even if they are able to judge a digital computer as having a mind, their decision is irrelevent because of the fact that the computer is still only simulating thought via programmed protocols and cannot by definition actually generate what may be considered a "thought" in and of itself.
I believe that Searle has a reasonable argument, but I find it to be rather flimsy in that it is determined entirely by our current understanding of computer sciences and technology. It very well may happen in the future that a digital computer is developed which may very well be considered to have its own "mind." Although the problem itelf lies in the way a digital computer processes information and I fear that this method of processing will always be under heavy suspicion from those who doubt the legitimacy of "Strong AI" theory.
The concept has been presented that a "Strong AI" may be developed that does not violate the "Chinese Room" thought experiment, this AI would be developed using a method of replication of the human brain, using a computer. This is of course still strictly conceptual, but if it is possible for us to develop a technology that processes information in the same way as a human brain, we may be equally capable of developing a technology that is capable of replicating the way that brain may respond to such information.
So for now, we may say that "Strong AI" is not possible to exist, though this is entirely dependant on our current technological limitations and is extremely subject to change in the future.
--Discussion: What do you think about the possibilities of AI programs passing these tests?
The following Essay belongs to me:
The Strong AI Thesis
With the escalation of modern technology, we have come to a point where digital computers have become exceptionally powerful and complex. We have even begun to develop technology that could be considered artificial intelligence or "AI".There are hyopthetically two different kinds of AI, The Weak AI , That which may only be considered to be simulating a mind, and the "Strong AI", that which may be considered to actually be a mind. The development of this technology has sparked a discussion on the possibilities of what these kinds of AI are capable of, and whether or not they can truly be considered "minds." The debate has been sparked by modern philosophers who question whether such a computer can actually think, or simply simulate thought, or intelligence. This essay will discuss the differences in opinions relating to this subject. Alan Turing developed a test called the Turing Test, a test which may be used to determine whether or not a computer can be truly be considered a "Strong AI; This test involves communication between a computer and a person, with a panel of judges overlooking the conversation and determining whether or not a computer or human being is involved." As of the time this essay was written, no computer has ever passed the Turing test. There is a man named John Searle who has deep doubts as to whether a computer is even capable of passing this test. Searle has devised an arguement known as "The Chinese Room" thought experiment, which challenges the very idea that a computer may be capable of truly being a mind.
John Searle's "Chinese Room" thought experiment demonstrates that an AI, developed through a digital computer can only follow specific programming protocols, and will follow strict guidelines when presented with a problem or question. The manner in which this computer develops a solution or response cannot be considered a "Strong AI" because it does not comprehend an actual question or problem in the same way a human mind does, but instead uses a type of "Search Engine" to determine an apropriate response to the presented problem. John Searle does not accept the idea that the Turing test is an acceptable model for determining whether a computer can truly have a mind, for two reasons; A group of judges, being part of the test, can be subject to personal bias, and even if they are able to judge a digital computer as having a mind, their decision is irrelevent because of the fact that the computer is still only simulating thought via programmed protocols and cannot by definition actually generate what may be considered a "thought" in and of itself.
I believe that Searle has a reasonable argument, but I find it to be rather flimsy in that it is determined entirely by our current understanding of computer sciences and technology. It very well may happen in the future that a digital computer is developed which may very well be considered to have its own "mind." Although the problem itelf lies in the way a digital computer processes information and I fear that this method of processing will always be under heavy suspicion from those who doubt the legitimacy of "Strong AI" theory.
The concept has been presented that a "Strong AI" may be developed that does not violate the "Chinese Room" thought experiment, this AI would be developed using a method of replication of the human brain, using a computer. This is of course still strictly conceptual, but if it is possible for us to develop a technology that processes information in the same way as a human brain, we may be equally capable of developing a technology that is capable of replicating the way that brain may respond to such information.
So for now, we may say that "Strong AI" is not possible to exist, though this is entirely dependant on our current technological limitations and is extremely subject to change in the future.
--Discussion: What do you think about the possibilities of AI programs passing these tests?