Artificial IntelligenceCognitive Ability of Information Processing
Artificial Intelligence: Cognitive Ability or Information ProcessingComputers have become an integral part of our everyday lives. We rely upon these machines to perform innumerable tasks that we often take for granted. Most people realize that computers are able to perform the multitude of functions as a consequence of the programming they receive. These programs give computers a set of instructions that governs their transition from one information processing state to another. Thus, computational machines are able to respond to a certain set of inputs with a certain range of outputs. In order to comprehend programs one needs only to describe these instructions in functional terms. In this regard, computer programs are extremely similar to functional accounts of the human mind, which contend that in order to understand the mind, one must simply examine the relationship between stimulus and behavior. Consequently, the question has naturally arisen as to whether a computer which consisted of a sufficiently sophisticated program would be capable of thought. This question has resulted in lively debate, with one camp of people including John R. Searle emphatically denying the plausibility of Artificial Intelligence. On the
In " Is the Brain's Mind a Computer Program, " John R. In addition, this individual is provided with a rule book (in a language which he or she presumably understands) for matching Chinese symbols with other Chinese symbols. Searle's argument against artificial intelligence can essentially be summed up in three simple statements: (1) Computer programs are formal/syntactic (2) Human minds have mental contents or semantics (3) Syntax by itself is neither constitutive of nor sufficient for semantics. Instead, they contend that parallel processing computers, which process data in a similar manner as the human mind, might one day be able to exhibit cognition. Consequently, according to Searle, any artifact that produced mental phenomena would have to be able to duplicate the specific causal powers of brains and it could not do that just by running a formal computer program. First, the Chuchlands feel that a parallel processing system would offer a dramatic speed advantage over conventional computers. Hence, this individual would be able to satisfy the Turing test for comprehension of the Chinese language, although he does not actually have any understanding of the language. Each of them forces us to evaluate exactly what our conceptions are regarding the human mind and our ability to comprehend it. Yet the Churchlands respond by saying that (a) the individual neurons of the brain do not understand English and (b) Searle neglects to mention that an enormous amount of people would be required for this simulation. Nonetheless, absurd as this conclusion may appear now, the Churchlands point out that during the 19th century, when the scientific community did not appreciate the systematic parallels between the properties of light and of electromagnetic waves, this argument could have served as a compelling rebuttal to Maxwell's hypothesis. Yet, even if we do not, coming to a complete understanding of the mind is not what is relevant, rather learning more about ourselves is what is truly important. The Churchlands feel that a machine might be able to use something other than biochemical structures to achieve consciousness (parallel processing). This proof is structured to be similar to the Chinese room argument, and thus also has three basic premises: (1) Electricity and magnetism are forces (2) The essential property of light is luminance (3) Forces by themselves are neither constitutive of, nor sufficient for luminance. Searle does have a response to this parallel processing hypothesis.
Common topics in this essay:
John Searle,
Furthermore Maxwell,
Finally Chuchlands,
James Maxwell's,
Processing Computers,
Recognizing Churchlands,
English Searle,
Classical AI,
artificial intelligence,
Artificial Intelligence,
Chinese Churchlands,
constitutive nor,
neither constitutive,
cognitive ability,
parallel processing,
constitutive nor sufficient,
nor sufficient,
neither constitutive nor,
turing test,
rule book,
plausibility artificial intelligence,
computer program,
electromagnetic waves,
argument luminous argument,
provided rule book,
|
Acceptance Essays
