Not Artificial

  • Thread starter Mentat
  • Start date

Is the intelligence, of a man-made computer, artificial?

  • No, I agree with Mentat

    Votes: 4 26.7%
  • No, but for different reasons than Mentat's

    Votes: 6 40.0%
  • Yes, because...

    Votes: 5 33.3%

  • Total voters
    15
3,754
2
As many of you know, I object to the reference of all intelligence, other than that of organic beings, as being "artificial". That is the point of this thread. Here are the definitions of the key-words, "intelligence" and "artifical":

Merriam-Webster definition of "intelligence"
Main Entry: in·tel·li·gence
Pronunciation: in-'te-l&-j&n(t)s
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French, from Latin intelligentia, from intelligent-, intelligens intelligent
Date: 14th century
1 a (1) : the ability to learn or understand or to deal with new or trying situations : REASON; also : the skilled use of reason (2) : the ability to apply knowledge to manipulate one's environment or to think abstractly as measured by objective criteria (as tests)...

5 : the ability to perform computer functions
Webster's definition of "artificial"

2. Feigned, fictitious; not genuine or natural; as artificial tears.
I have not included all definitions of "artificial" because I only object to the application of this (the quoted) one.

It seems as though many (maybe most) people believe that the intelligence of a man-made computer is "artificial", or not genuine. I disagree. I think that a man-made computer can ("can" is a key-word, as my argument has nothing to do with the current limits of technology) posses all of the qualities listed in the above definition of "intelligence", and that there is nothing ingenuine about it.

What is your opinion (please give the reason for choosing as you do)?
 
Last edited:
1,596
0
Anything that is man-made, wether this is a car or a computer, is artificial.
 

FZ+

1,550
2
It depends on the meaning of artificial you use. If you imply that non-organic intelligent must inherently be different from organic ones, even inferior, I disagree. But it's pretty clear that computerised AIs as we now construct them are "man made" and hence in that way artificial. It may be different for the products of evolutionary programming though...

Is there a word for "self made"?
 

RuroumiKenshin

Originally posted by heusdens
Anything that is man-made, wether this is a car or a computer, is artificial.
\

I agree with heusdens.

Mentat, I believe you are arguing on behalf of intellegence "itself"?
So, if I may interpose, "can" (as you said is the key word on your arguement) is verb that requires a will, that is, a certain extent of freewill in, if not all (which I doubt), some cases. So how can a computer have free will? Free will is not only a neurological senstion, but is more of a psychological sensation which, either way, involves chemical reactions. I honestly don't how a computer "can". I know "can" can be used as "Can the computer occupy an '03 program?", but my argument of "can" is based on the context of "Can the compter expand its hard drive?" or something of that sort; IOW, "can" in the context of a will. Before I can establish a definte conviction on this point, I should like Mentat to explain the way he is using "can" in his argument.
 
152
0
i support that the computer is artificial
becuase the computer is create by a human
if our world no human being ...
than no computer at all
 
466
0
Ok, this ones for alexander. An organic entity is a chemical reaction which functions according to it's functions which have been built over time via natural selection. These functions allow awareness via sensory input. There is nothing abstract about it. These inputs are stored and processed according to the needs of other functions. Thinking is done in accordance with the accomplishing of these functions according to highest order Mos Lowwww in a phisological frame of reference. No Carp here.

A computer accomplishs a second functions according to the limitations of it's hardware and preset functions. It's abilty to learn is programmed like us. Even if a program written to learn is written it can learn only to the limit of those predefined functions outward. It will not be able to reason new formulas which have not been preprogrammed with a higher order than has been programmed. A human being can only because the matrix for a human being is far more complex than any computer that can ever be built.

A computer may be able to perform limited sets(Chess) and actually outperform human beings as long as it plots deep enough to a degree, this is a limited set of logic performed outward.

Today you are all Zombies. And judging from your posts on both forums I witnessed that some of you like to play both ends against the middle when it is convienient.

This means human beings are "not concious" and should remove all references to this other than to establish a reframe of reference for a reboot of your human PC with electrical activity. When that activity stops you are dead - same as a computer. Sorry you are no better than ants here.

or

Your other option is the universe is concious behind and throughout the entire infinite creation. These are your only two options. You have no other choices. Sorry you are not better than ants here.


Oh yea the fish thing is a is a subconsious representation of my unexpressed conciousness in the chemical machine or it is that and a little more. Who among you is brave? Who can stand up against reality itself? Do you think you can bear the weight of the question?

No settlers allowed - don't waste my time fish.
 
3,754
2
Originally posted by heusdens
Anything that is man-made, wether this is a car or a computer, is artificial.
Yes, in the sense of "artificial"'s meaning "man-made". However, the definition that I argue against, is that of not being genuine, or being "fake".
 
3,754
2
Originally posted by FZ+
It depends on the meaning of artificial you use. If you imply that non-organic intelligent must inherently be different from organic ones, even inferior, I disagree. But it's pretty clear that computerised AIs as we now construct them are "man made" and hence in that way artificial. It may be different for the products of evolutionary programming though...

Is there a word for "self made"?
Well, I tried to make sure (in my first post) that people knew that I was refering only to the defining of a "man-made" computer's intelligence as non-genuine. That's the kind of "artificial" I meant.

I know that they are man-made, and thus "artificial", but I don't think that their intelligence is - in anyway - less genuine than ours.
 
3,754
2
Originally posted by MajinVegeta
\

I agree with heusdens.

Mentat, I believe you are arguing on behalf of intellegence "itself"?
So, if I may interpose, "can" (as you said is the key word on your arguement) is verb that requires a will, that is, a certain extent of freewill in, if not all (which I doubt), some cases. So how can a computer have free will? Free will is not only a neurological senstion, but is more of a psychological sensation which, either way, involves chemical reactions. I honestly don't how a computer "can". I know "can" can be used as "Can the computer occupy an '03 program?", but my argument of "can" is based on the context of "Can the compter expand its hard drive?" or something of that sort; IOW, "can" in the context of a will. Before I can establish a definte conviction on this point, I should like Mentat to explain the way he is using "can" in his argument.
Ok, that's a reasonable request. When I say "can" I don't imply free will, or even will, of any kind. When I say "can", I say it in the sense of having the potential to do something. A sub-atomic*can* decay - this doesn't mean that it has a "will" of any kind, it just has the potential to do so.
 
3,754
2
Originally posted by newton1
i support that the computer is artificial
becuase the computer is create by a human
if our world no human being ...
than no computer at all
Yes, the computer is man-made. However, I am not talking about that definition of "artificial". I am talking about whether or not a computer's intelligence is genuine. One definition of "artificial" is "not genuine" - and many people apply this definition to man-made computers. Is this your view?
 
181
1
I agree a computers intellegence is no less legitament than our own.if we are created by God and God Is doing everything,then one would have to accept that if a AI was brought online,God would be in charge of the AI's consciousness,the the AI or to us consciouns would be the same,because God gives us our consciouness,so what's the difference.
 
3,754
2
Originally posted by TENYEARS
Ok, this ones for alexander. An organic entity is a chemical reaction which functions according to it's functions which have been built over time via natural selection. These functions allow awareness via sensory input. There is nothing abstract about it. These inputs are stored and processed according to the needs of other functions. Thinking is done in accordance with the accomplishing of these functions according to highest order Mos Lowwww in a phisological frame of reference. No Carp here.

A computer accomplishs a second functions according to the limitations of it's hardware and preset functions. It's abilty to learn is programmed like us. Even if a program written to learn is written it can learn only to the limit of those predefined functions outward. It will not be able to reason new formulas which have not been preprogrammed with a higher order than has been programmed. A human being can only because the matrix for a human being is far more complex than any computer that can ever be built.

A computer may be able to perform limited sets(Chess) and actually outperform human beings as long as it plots deep enough to a degree, this is a limited set of logic performed outward.

Today you are all Zombies. And judging from your posts on both forums I witnessed that some of you like to play both ends against the middle when it is convienient.

This means human beings are "not concious" and should remove all references to this other than to establish a reframe of reference for a reboot of your human PC with electrical activity. When that activity stops you are dead - same as a computer. Sorry you are no better than ants here.

or

Your other option is the universe is concious behind and throughout the entire infinite creation. These are your only two options. You have no other choices. Sorry you are not better than ants here.


Oh yea the fish thing is a is a subconsious representation of my unexpressed conciousness in the chemical machine or it is that and a little more. Who among you is brave? Who can stand up against reality itself? Do you think you can bear the weight of the question?

No settlers allowed - don't waste my time fish.
No one needs to stand up against reality. People are real, aren't they? If people are real, then they must stand up against themselves, in order to stand up against reality.
 
152
0
Originally posted by Mentat
Yes, the computer is man-made. However, I am not talking about that definition of "artificial". I am talking about whether or not a computer's intelligence is genuine. One definition of "artificial" is "not genuine" - and many people apply this definition to man-made computers. Is this your view?
i don't think the computer is genuine
if in the future
the human can make a "life" for a computer
that time i think human is become the god already
 
3,754
2
Originally posted by newton1
i don't think the computer is genuine
if in the future
the human can make a "life" for a computer
that time i think human is become the god already
What makes you think that a man-made computer isn't alive? A human is alive, and we're computers.
 
152
0
Originally posted by Mentat
What makes you think that a man-made computer isn't alive? A human is alive, and we're computers.
and i ask back from you
what proof show human is a computer??
how to explain our mind? our feel? our creativeness?? and our lust?
 
152
0
i'm also don't believe that the human enable create a computer
which have a same intelligence with human....
just like a god....
can god create the other new god? or just enable to create the human
 

FZ+

1,550
2
what proof show human is a computer??
how to explain our mind? our feel? our creativeness?? and our lust?
Ask your local neurologist.
And ask yourself this: What happens when we are born, when we grow a brain? Isn't consciousness created then by man?

i'm also don't believe that the human enable create a computer
which have a same intelligence with human....
Why not? Is it a technical reason or a philosophical one?

can god create the other new god? or just enable to create the human
That's theology but why not? God is supposedly omnipotent.
 
152
0
Originally posted by FZ+
Ask your local neurologist.
And ask yourself this: What happens when we are born, when we grow a brain? Isn't consciousness created then by man?

this is call natura, a human being

Why not? Is it a technical reason or a philosophical one?

FZ+
u just always say why not
u haven give any scientific proof

That's theology but why not? God is supposedly omnipotent.
you omnipotent can create the other omnipotent...
it just like the god give u 3 wish
then u say the 1st wish is want another the other 3 wish
the second wish is want another 10 wish.....
then this is no end....
u think it's possible
i don't think so
 
152
0
FZ+
u just always say why not
u never give any scientific proof
there is no any phonomenon show me that can happen
so i don't believe
 

RuroumiKenshin

newton:
and i ask back from you
what proof show human is a computer??
how to explain our mind? our feel? our creativeness?? and our lust?
We are essentially [basically] computers. Computers posess a basic anatomy of our own human brain. The mind and brain are two different references. The mind is supposedly unexplained (that is, it does not hhave an "absolute" definition) but Mentat will do an excellent job explaining this. I will just say that the brain is an organ of the mind.
This is the definition of a computer:

A device that computes, especially a programmable electronic machine that performs high-speed mathematical or logical operations or that assembles, stores, correlates, or otherwise processes information.
Humans posess these characteristics; excluding the high speed calculations when compared to an industrial computer.

Humans are much more complicated than industrial computers are. This explains for creativity and feelings. Our physcological reactions and stuff is all a result of chemical reactions that are effected by the perceptions of our senses. We cannot, yet, replicate this in an industrial computer. Note that I said "industrial" when I refer to computers. This is supposed to help you identify which sort of computer I am refering to; the industrial kind.
 

RuroumiKenshin

Originally posted by newton1
FZ+
u just always say why not
u never give any scientific proof
there is no any phonomenon show me that can happen
so i don't believe
If I may speak on behalf of FZ:
FZ says "why not" simply in persuit of the reason why something cannot be done differently, so to speak. It is a perfectly logical, and admirable trait, I think. You learn more that way.
Also, creating a computer the is just like a human is feasible, onece we understand how to do it. If you had any neurological knowledge, you'd have realized it is not as complex as one thinks, morally (i think this is because of human pride...). The feelings we expereince are all a series of chemical reactions. Creativity is the ability to create a possible replica of something that you have percieved before, and quite simply, put it together. (like abstract art). I recommend reading about neurological disorders, this'll help your understanding.
Proof? What kind of proof? physical?? If you wanted any proof you should ask.
So do have to see to believe? I believe electrons exist although I don't see them.
 
3,754
2
So, who still believes that synthetic (man-made) intelligence is artificial (not genuine)? Why do you still believe so?
 
Originally posted by Mentat

What is your opinion (please give the reason for choosing as you do)?
Rest assured that fake intelligence is not what McCarthy had in mind when he coined "artificial intelligence", nor is it what any researchers in the field have in mind now (at least not in any skeptical or derogatory sense). Now there is a very uncontentious sense of "artificial" under which it just means "created by an artificer", and AI is clearly that. But part of the implication of the term is that AI models don't need to have psychological realism to be AI models. We use them to study animal cognition, and animal cognition only seems intelligent when all of its relatively stupid and unintelligent parts start working in unison. So it's not surprising that there are AI programs that have no psychological realism at all, or seem utterly stupid, but still count as AI. They count as AI because they help us learn something of how our own minds work.

Perhaps once we have full-blown general intelligence of a human level, calling it AI may suddenly seem inappropriate because of this implication. But since we are nowhere near such models as of yet, it's artificial intelligence, and not artificial intelligence.
 

RuroumiKenshin

Originally posted by Mentat
So, who still believes that synthetic (man-made) intelligence is artificial (not genuine)? Why do you still believe so?
It would first be wise to define what geniune intelligence is. So then we could answer this question according to the definition we come up with.
 
60
0
yes artificial
as in not natural
as in not occuring in nature

But if we were to create a fully self aware AI i dont think it should be treated differnetly than any other individual.
 

Related Threads for: Not Artificial

  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
32
Views
7K
  • Last Post
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
20
Views
14K
  • Last Post
Replies
5
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Top