When does technology become artificial intelligence?: Philosophy Forums

Page: 1 2 3 4 5

When does technology become artificial intelligence?

YadaYada
fool

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jun 12, 2004
Location: in the past

Total Topics: 5
Total Posts: 316

Posted 08/26/04 - 09:42 AM:	#41
Stencil wrote: But machines are no where near A.I. Sure, they already self replicate in the sense that they build other machines. They can be programmed to simulate fear, surprise, anger, lust, whatever. However, they lack consciousness, emotions, forgetfullness, and heuristic thinking. Programming that is essentially anti-programming. Machines don't require consciousness or emotions to have independent intelligence. Those are requirements for higher level animals and humans. Designs that perform only the essential pragmatic functions of recognition and cognition are enough. To understand the mind may be one of the goals of AI, to build an exact replica is not. All aspect of the mind are functions of the brain, a biological, physically real part of a living organism. Our lack of ability to understand the mind does not imply that it is magical in its existence. It may be incredible, complex, amazing, but it is not magical.
{}{}{}{ . . . }{}{}{ . . . }{}{}{}{}{ . . . We may assume the superiority ceteris paribus of the demonstration which derives from fewer postulates ~ Aristotle

Justus
Assistant Professor

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jul 26, 2004
Location: KY, USA

Total Topics: 15
Total Posts: 419

Posted 08/26/04 - 10:22 AM:	#42
Humans are machines. We are organic devices that replicate themselves and run complex systems to sustain themselves. Our programing is in our genes. Our genes instruct our individual parts what to do with themselves. A robot or A.I. would be much in the same like us. They would have all the essentials that we have except in a different format (inorganic). However since we seek to make them like us, they will be like us. Would we go as far as to give A.I. the ability to dream and to question itself? Just like genes are the master of ourselves, we (the programmers) will be the masters of A.I. We decide how the A.I. will function and how it will grow itself. I feel that intelligence is the ability to develop oneself. The more intelligent something is, the better it is at adapting and manipulating its environment (forgetting about physical prowess, of course.) If we can create programs that can develop themselves, then they are intelligent. If they can develop themselves in a greater scale than we can ourselves, then they will be more intelligent than us.
"The present existing intellectuals have declared their own bankruptcy by abandoning the intellect. What we need today out of an intellectual would be any man or woman who is willing to think. Meaning, any man or woman who knows that man's life must be guided by reason, by the intellect, and not by feelings, wishes, whims or mystical relations." -Ayn Rand

Usergroup: Guests
Joined:

Total Topics:
Total Posts:

Posted 08/26/04 - 01:26 PM:	#43
Justus wrote: A robot or A.I. would be much in the same like us. They would have all the essentials that we have except in a different format (inorganic). However since we seek to make them like us, they will be like us. Sense there's no other template for what we would call intelligence, at least intelligence that we could relate to in a meaningful way, it seems to me that we would have to use ourselves. Just to get off the bench and do something they would have to be given core level motives like [and please forgive the reference] "will to power." It would take a grate deal of self-control to not create a 'challenging machine', could get dicey.

argus_apocraphex
Space Monkey

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Aug 26, 2004
Location: Oshawa, Ontario

Total Topics: 2
Total Posts: 15

Posted 08/26/04 - 05:59 PM:	#44
Technology becomes A.I. when it can reason, and or think. I do see where you're coming from though.
infinity?

OnceFlewOver
Aspirant

Usergroup: Members
Joined: May 01, 2004

Total Topics: 4
Total Posts: 32

Posted 08/29/04 - 07:08 PM:	#45
Ajax wrote: Sense there's no other template for what we would call intelligence, at least intelligence that we could relate to in a meaningful way, it seems to me that we would have to use ourselves. Yes, perhaps intelligence was the wrong word chosen. Simply because it has so many components, and it can be viewed in so many different ways. (I've attempted once to list the many common types of intelligence; problem-solving, common sense, new information intake, memory, adaptability, but they always seem to overlap or be incomplete. Interestingly enough, to have one form of intelligence doesn't guarantee any others; that's where you get those amazing debator book-braniac types with no problem solving skills in real life whatsoever. Always puzzles me.) But this is all beside the point. I always thought of technology to become "AI" when it has stepped out of it's pre-recorded programming. If that's possible. Basically the freedom to choose the (let me borrow words) improbable over the probable, the mathematically "wrong" choice, so to speak. But I'm not sure that can happen without emotion. But even behind emotion there's often reason. Ay, methinks this is turning into a free will question.

Reformed Nihilist
Oblong

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jul 15, 2004
Location: The mighty fortress of the north

Total Topics: 68
Total Posts: 7921

Posted 08/30/04 - 07:04 AM:	#46
OnceFlewOver wrote: I always thought of technology to become "AI" when it has stepped out of it's pre-recorded programming. If that's possible. Basically the freedom to choose the (let me borrow words) improbable over the probable, the mathematically "wrong" choice, so to speak. But I'm not sure that can happen without emotion. But even behind emotion there's often reason. Ay, methinks this is turning into a free will question. I think that there are semantic problems with freedom of thought. A human will act out of emotion or intellect, and will often have complex motivations, but will always do what they think is the 'best' thing they can do. Computers do the same (already). I think that it is difficult to seperate emotional and intellectual descision making responses in a human, and I don't know if you can program AE (artificial emotion) without programming a survival instinct that over-rides everything else (I doubt it would happen, as I don't see any value in that). I would suggest that if we look at how we commonly use the word intelligence (as it is seperate from emotionality), computers today are already a little 'intellegent'.
Nobody ever became a famous philosopher by being a champion of ecumenical hybridism Daniel Dennett Freedom Evolves

Page: 1 2 3 4 5

Sorry, you don't have permission to post. Log in, or register if you haven't yet.