This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.View Full Document
Unformatted text preview: So, if we accept that other human beings are conscious, then we must also accept that we can determine whether they are conscious by examining their behavior. BUT, if computers/machines can convince us that they are conscious, then we have no reason to think that they are not conscious. (5) Arguments from Various Disabilities Machines/computers cannot think for they cannot perform some of the things that humans can. 1. Machines cannot make mistakes. Why is this a problem? Couldn't a machine be programmed to make mistakes? > response: “programmed mistakes” are not actual mistakes. Turing says there are two types of mistakes that machines can make: a. Errors of functioning – mechanical failure b. Errors of conclusion – gives the wrong answer 2. Computers cannot be the subjects of their own thoughts 3. Machines do not learn from experience Turing: If learning = changing one's behavior according to stimuli, then machines can learn (6) Lovelace's objection Machines can't do anything novel Turing: Machines can do something that will surprise us. > Is there any originality to be found in human beings? • art – our creative self • variation – how we live our own lives • evolution • free will September 11, 2012 1. Can computers think? 2. Are minds computers?- MIND IS THE SOFTWARE & BRAIN IS THE HARDWARE (computational interpretation) > mind = thinks, feels, has desires Haugeland Three dilemmas: (1) How can psychology of thinking be scientific?- If minds are computers, it has to follow certain rules; to study the mind, we only need to study how the software is being run – what are the rules that it's following? (2) How do you explain rule-following behavior?- Correct application of a rule implies that that rule has to have meaning . (3) How does the mind interact with the body (brain)? What are computers? > Haugeland says: automated formal systems • Defining a formal system 1) define the tokens 2) define starting position 3) define what the legal moves are • Formal systems are medium-independent • If minds are formal systems (which are medium-independent), then minds can be made out of anything • 3 fixtures of a formal system 1) Self-contained- Nothing from the outside world matters 2) Definite- We know precisely what the legal moves are – no “maybe” 3) Finitely checkable- We can check whether a move is legal Semantics vs. syntax syntax → specifies rules/symbols - “grammar” - properties of formal systems semantics → relation to the world - “meaning” - interpretation of formal systems Formal systems “live a double life” - Haugeland (pp. 205) If you have syntax, you get semantics → if you take care of the rules and the grammar, you take care of the meaning (If by semantics you mean preservation of truth) • start with something that is true, then you get a conclusion that is also true • starting position MUST have truth Haugeland says: syntax → truth, but will not get you everything that means “making sense”...
View Full Document
- Fall '10
- Turing, intuition pump