Study Guides (238,295)
United States (119,730)
Philosophy (111)
CAS PH 100 (24)
All (10)

Philosophy Notes [COMPLETE] (4.0ed the FINAL using these notes)

17 Pages
Unlock Document

Boston University
CAS PH 100

Philosophy – how everything fits together • Questions authorities • Conceptual analysis • Assertion>premise>conclusion • Deductive – conclusion logically follows from premises o Validity  Independent of truth o Sound - when premise 1 and 2 are true • Inductive – conclusion not necessary accepting premise o Inference, a generalization, assumption “Can machines think?”- Alan Turing • Machines=computers • According to alan turing, a machine is intelligent if it could pass the following test: o Alan turing was one of the founders of artificial intelligence • Make people unable to tell if the person is a human or a machine in the imitation game • The imitation game=the turing test o computer is intelligible if the judge cannot tell who is who o Passing the test requires consistency • “Are there imaginable digital computers which would do well in the imitation game?” o Is Turing providing us with a definition of intelligence? o If the computer passes the Turing test, then a computer is intelt must not be understood as a necessary condition for intligiblesufficient condition for intelligence o The turing test must not be understood as a necessary condition for intelligence • Is turing correct to hold that a machine thinks if it can perform well in the imitation game? • Are there imaginable digital computers which would do well in the imitation game? o Turing considers 9 objections: 1. Theological objection • Only beings that have souls can think>machines do not have souls>therefore, machines do not think • Turing: If god can give a soul to a human then it should to a machine. To insist that god could not do so is to limit god’s powers 2. Heads in the Sand objection • If machines can think, then humans will not be the most superior creation 3. The mathematical Objection • Computers cannot answer every question • There are questions to which machines cannot provide answers>a machine is thinking only if it can answer all questions>therefore, machines cannot think • Turing: we make mistakes too 4. The argument from consciousness • Only conscious beings/entities can think>machines are not conscious>therefore, machines cannot think • Turing: how do we know whether one is conscious? You can only know Christie is conscious if you are Christie. 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 5. Arguments from various disabilities • Machines cannot think for they cannot perform some of the things can humans can • Machines cannot be kind, resourceful, beautiful, learn from experience….. • Turing: we don’t think machines are friendly because we haven’t seen any. But that doesn’t mean that machines can’t be friendly. • Machines cannot make mistakes • Turing: a machine could be programmed to make mistakes • Response: programmed mistakes are not really mistakes • Turing: errors of functioning (mechanical and electrical fault) and errors of conclusion 6. Computers are not the subject of their own thoughts • Computers are not conscious • Turing: we only know that we are conscious if we are the man itself • The only evidence we have is behavior 7. Programs can’t learn • Turing: Learn means to input environmental stimuli, but computers can do that so therefore computers are intelligent 8. Cannot perform original acts/create something new • Computers are just following a program so it can never surprise someone • Turing: nothing is original because there is also a basis of where the idea formed. Usually from what we learn. Computers can surprise us • Only surprising when it comes to the user, not the programmer • Art • Variation • Evolution • Free will John Haugeland Reading 1. Can computers think 2. Are minds computers? a. Mind is the software i. Mind includes consciousness, mentality, thinking, desires b. Brain is the hardware • ISSUES THE READING MENTIONS o How can psychology of thinking be scientific?  If minds are like computers that follow rules, then we can scientifically look at the rules o How to explain rule following behavior? o How does the mind interact with the body? • What are computers? o Features of formal systems  Defining tokens – what everything is  Starting positions  Legal moves • Moves must be definite, no maybes, and must be checkable o Self contained – not influenced by environment o AUTOMATIC formal system  Plays chess, by ITSELF • SEMANTICS/SYNTAX o Syntax – rules. Ability to manipulate symbols/tokens  Think of it as the grammar o Semantics – interpretations. Relation to the world  Think of it as the meaning of the grammar • Syntaxsemantics o Syntax can take care of the truth because if you take care of the grammar the rules then you will get to the semantics o Problem: mind doesn’t only follow rules, it does a lot of other things o Problem: it will get you the truth but it wont get you the meaning • Syntax vs semantics o Syntax is grammar and semantics is meaning • Haugeland believes that if you take care of the syntax, semantics will take care of itself • Rules are truth preserving for syntax • Claim: minds are computers of a certain sort o But minds are not only good at following rules or solving problems, they do it in a consistent way o Therefore there must be some form of automatic formal system to it • In addition to truth preserving, the formal system must be o Rational: capable of easily generating obvious, logical, and commonsensical consequences and eliminating inconsistencies o Capable of reliable interacting with the world o Cooperative in communication o “knowledgeable” of certain assumptions of language and discourse • Computational approach to the mind holds that intelligent beings are computers o We are automatic formal systems that can be interpreted in a way that consistently makes sense o If “making sense” was equivalent to “being truth preserving” then the computational approach would have been vindicated o But the two terms are not equivalent • Two objections to the computational approach o Objection 1: hollow shell strategy. Minds are not semantic engines  Computers are missing care, derived intentionality, consciousness… o Computers are not conscious.  Same response as turing o Minds are not semantic engines because understanding requires original intentionality and semantic engines only have derived intentionality  What does it mean to have original intentionality?  Depends on whether the object has a suitable structure and disposition relative to the environment o Objection 2: poor substitute strategy. Minds cannot be semantic engines because semantic engines are not even capable of acting as if they understand John Searle: Is the brain’s mind a computer program • Searle refutes strong AI • Strong AI: thinking is merely the manipulation of formal symbols o Thinking is independent of the brain; brains think but other things can too, like comps • If Searle is right then strong AI is false. If Searle is right then the computational approach is also false o Minds are not computers o Minds can think computers cannot • Chinese room argument o If the person cannot understand Chinese, then neither can the computer o 1. Computers are formal systems (syntactic) o 2.human minds have mental contents (semantics) o 3. Syntax by itself is neither constitutive of nor sufficient for semantics o 4. Programs are neither constitutive of nor sufficient for semantics o 5. Strong AI is false • Common responses to the Chinese room argument o Understanding without knowledge  One can understand X without knowing that one understands X o Understanding of a subsystem  The person in the Chinese room does not understand Chinese but an unconscious part of it does o Systems reply  The person in the Chinese room does not understand Chinese but the WHOLE room does.  Searle: if you memorize the rule book and do all the symbol manipulations inside your mind. Do you understand Chinese now? No. BASICALLY WHAT SEARLE IS SAYING: • Computers are formal (syntactic) • Human minds have mental contents (semantic content) • Syntax by itself is not enough for semantics • Computers are not minds THE MIND BODY PROBLEM • What is the relationship between mind and body/brain/world? • Nature of the mind Dualism - Mind and the brain are two radically different kinds of beings  Body  in time and space, composed of matter, situated in a common field,I can fucking touch other bodies  Mind in time but not in space, not composed of matter, isolated, no direct connection between other minds; indirect connection or interaction o Substance dualism – substance may be characterized by its properties, but it is more than its properties; it is also that which has those properties. there are two kinds of substances/entities in the world – physical and mental  Two completely different things o Property dualism – there are two kinds of properties in the world – physical and mental. Nonetheless they are properties of the same kinds of entities (i.e. physical objects) o Substance dualism > property dualism The ways of addressing the question in dualism between mind and body o Parallelism – there is no causal interaction between mind and brain; they only appear to causally connected  Mind and brain are pre-programmed to work at the same time like clocks  Mental -> I want to raise my arm  Physical -> I raise my arm o Epiphenomenalism – the physical brain can cause the mental (mind) but not vice versa o Interactionism- there is interaction between the physical brain and the mental mind  Problem: how is this interaction happening Physicalism – all that exists in the world are either physical entities  Behaviorism – to talk about the mind is to talk either about the way we behave or about the way we are disposed to behave o The mind can be explained without reference to mental events or inner psychological states/processes  The mind is its bodily manifestations/inferences o You know it is raining when you see someone do a set of behaviors that makes you believe so o Problem: circular or infinite number of behaviors o Problem: don’t we have inner feelings or inner mental states that can occur without their behavior manifestations?  Identity theory – the mind is identical to the brain o Mind IS brain o Problem: Clark kent is superman. But that doesn’t mean that clark kent shares the same properties with superman of flying.  Functionalism – the doctrine that what makes something a mental state of a particular type does not depend on its internal constitution, but rather on the way it functions, or the role it play, in the system of which it is a part WHAT IS CONSCIOUSNESS??? • 1. C
More Less

Related notes for CAS PH 100

Log In


Don't have an account?

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.