Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Chinese room wikipedia , lookup
Artificial intelligence in video games wikipedia , lookup
Embodied cognitive science wikipedia , lookup
Technological singularity wikipedia , lookup
History of artificial intelligence wikipedia , lookup
Intelligence explosion wikipedia , lookup
Philosophy of artificial intelligence wikipedia , lookup
Existential risk from artificial general intelligence wikipedia , lookup
Page |1 Patrick Davis Colin Hull English 1010 July 16, 2012 Source Analysis In recent discussions of Future technologies, a controversial issue has been Artificial Intelligence Technology. Some individuals argue that there are many issues to be accounted for when discussing AI and the implications of their existence. Three individual’s views on this topic include the viewpoints of Nick Bostrom, Sean Robsville, and Edwin Furse. Bostrom: On one hand, some, such as Nick Bostrom part of the philosophy faculty at Oxford University, argues that “there are problems and benefits with Super Intelligences”. From this perspective Bostrom makes it clear that if the AI created can connect with humans on a “friend” level that we can coexist harmoniously. This viewpoint describes how AI, once implanted with the concept that humans are friends, can realize the benefits of helping us and cause no harm. Bostrom also adds how once the concept of “friend” is branded into the programmed mind of an AI it can never be removed. Bostrom says “it is crucial that it be provided with human-friendly motivations”. In his argument for the importance of making friendliness an AI’s main motivation Bostrom tackles the topic of “should development be Page |2 delayed or accelerated”. This section of his 5 point article lists some of the problems being wrong motivations of its creators and a list of the benefits this super intelligence could create. The other four sections of Bostrom’s views are why super intelligences are different, what their moral thinking might include, and the importance of their motivations. His paper references other writers such as Robert A Freitas, writer of many books on Nanotechnology, and Eric K Drexler, author of Engines of Creation. Bostrom’s argument is backed up by a lot of other credible sources opinions and each one adds to the ethos of his article. However, citing these sources in APA format instead of MLA format detract from informing the reader of the credentials of these sources because they are not listed in the text. Furse: Still others such as Edmund Furse, researcher at the Department of Computer Studies, argue that intelligent robots will exist and that they will have a religious life also. This point of view is an argument that this other form of intelligence, separate from ours, will exist and details how they will act. Furse has a six sided argument for Strong AI. The first part of this argument describes how neuroscience will find a way to map the human brain in time. The second part describes how we are coming closer to recognizing how the mind works, and how our increasing technology is going to progress to a super advanced processor that could be the same size as the human brain. The third part compares the human brain to a machine. The fourth part describes how attempts at creating an artificial intelligence are coming closer and closer to actualization. The fifth argument describes algorithm and them becoming more identifiable. The sixth and final argument states all we need to do to create a Strong AI is to first Page |3 understand how the human brain learns. These various perspectives show us that the issue can been seen from many different views. These views can range from religious, arguments for and against their creation, as well as argument if the possibility is even reachable and what it will be like. A good portion for the rest of Furse’s argument details the religious life of future robots and are weighted heavily towards Furse’s religion Christianity, of which he is a the chairman of the Catholic Psychology Group. These sections in his article discussing robotic religion have a lot of ethos to them, because he identifies with the readers who are religious with discussing things like “the priesthood” “the Holy Eucharist” and “baptism of robots”. These views, given his belief structure are also reflected in his moral and social issues section where he, while discussing losing jobs to robots says “If there is nothing for us to do, then we can always worship God”. Robsville: On the other hand, however, others, such as Sean Robsville, a writer and blogger of many Buddhist articles, argue only arguments against Artificial Intelligence. Robsville gives us the definition of computationalism and materialism and relates them to artificial intelligence. Using computationalism as a platform and Buddhism as a reference, Robsville argues to how a true AI could not exist. Computationalism is described by Robsville as “the view that all human mental activities are reducible to algorithms, and could therefore be implemented into a computer”. For those who maintain this belief, Artificial Intelligence is definitely in the foreseeable future. However Buddhists believe that existence is much more than any Page |4 computable calculation and does not believe that humanistic artificial intelligence could ever exist based on its non-sentient properties. On top of not being a very credible source, Robsville has a Buddhism biased lean in his article which is a notable position he takes juxtaposed to other articles he has written. According to Robsville Technological AI can only express “some” features of human intelligence. Robsville states that “the real test of Artificial Intelligence would be to produce a general purpose algorithm-creating algorithm”. According to this view Buddhists believe this algorithm could never be programmed or created. These three views take us three different directions on the subject of artificial intelligence. Bostrom’s view tries to tackle their motives among other things, while Furse covers how they will react after creation and their pros and cons, and lastly Robsville argues the possibility of their creation. All views are well explained and argued. While Robsville has the least amount of sources and not the strongest credentials, Bostrom uses many credible sources in his article, and Furse as a university researcher at the Department of Computer Science uses opinions that are all his own. I think that the best and most reputable argument of these writers is Bostrom’s because of all his neurologist and nanotechnologist sources. After researching into the background of his sources it’s hard to believe that with all of the books they’ve had published by reputable publishers that his ideas are not credible. Robsville’s article seems too short of a paper to accurately explain what he was trying to, and could have used more references and length. While both of these two men used sources in their articles Furse’s was quiet possibly the most entertaining based on the topics he covered and how humorous it was that he even tackled Page |5 such things as “Is the creation of an intelligent robot an act that only God should do?” and ” Will robots marry and have children?”.