Minds, Brains, and Programs - Essay Example

Minds, Brains, and Programs Introduction The emergence of computers has been functionally and practical symbols of transformation and revolution of the world in terms of modernization. The emergence of robots was a controversial issue as many people thought that the reports would replace human beings in form of labor. However, this did not happen, as there emerged the difference of artificial and natural evidence. Similarly, the emergence of computers has not escaped criticism, many scholars have being agreeing, and disagreeing about the intelligence level of the computer compared to humans. It is important to understand that human beings are responsible for building and assembling of computers. For this reason, it is important to distinguish between a strong artificial intelligence and a weak intelligence. One of such critics is John Searle who describes strong artificial intelligence with regard to the computer is that it is able to formulate and test hypothesis in a more rigorous and precise fashion with very minimal errors. However, Searle points out that the basis of the strength and precision of computer is not the brain but the programs, which have been installed in the computer. This means that computers have cognitive states, which are much stronger and accurate compared to that of a human being. A Turing test is the ability of the computer or a machine to give and express intelligent behavior, which is almost equivalent and is indistinguishable from human beings. Allan Turing who aimed at determining if computers can think developed this concept in 1950 (John R. Searle 54). In his test, he was not refereeing to the ability of the machines offering the right answers to the question but how the answers are closely linked to human response. The test therefore did not consider audio receptions but relied on text only channels. The test relies on artificial intelligence since it involves machines in testing if the computer is able to give accurate and precise answers. As expected Allan Turing test did not go without criticism. From a philosophical point of view Descartes agrees with the Turing test on the basis of automation but he was quick to denounce the test on the basis that it human beings can think and give answers and that machines can give the right answers and cannot think. It therefore means that even though machines can interpret information and give the right answers that do not qualify them to be superior to human on the basis of thinking. In addition to this, Searle disagrees with the Turing test on the subject that even though computers can respond to different languages and give the correct answers, they only provided the right answers but without understanding and this is what distinguishes artificial intelligence with human intelligence. A human being can only respond to a language if he/she has an understanding of the language. However, machines can do this better with the help of coded programs does not mean that the computer understands the language. To support his concept, Searle performed a Chinese room test where an English native speaker man is placed in room and shown Chinese symbols. The man fails to understand the Chinese symbol and language through writings since he is not a Chinese speaker. In the second test, the same man is given the same symbols but this time with interpreted English codes, which gives the meaning of the words and the man, begins to relate the English words with the Chinese symbols. Searle calls this the question and answer technique. If a Chinese native speaker is taken through the same test, similar results will be produced and it will be difficult to distinguish between answers from the English and Chinese speakers. We therefore conclude that the English native speaker has been able to answer Chinese questions even though he does not understand them. This does not make the human being intelligent since he has been able to answer questions that he does not understand. It is the coding of the English and Chinese languages that has enabled this man to respond and give the right answers. This is the basis of Searle’s argument. He argues that computers once fed with the right programs can simulate human beings and produce the right answers in a more precise and reliable way without errors and this does not make them intelligent than human beings since they do not think. The argument is therefore on the ability of either the machine or the human to reason. This is the distinguishing point. Even though the computer programs are passing the Turing test, they can never be related to human minds since the human mind is not only able to interpret but also understand both languages with time. The program cannot be related to a human mind because it will never understand the any language but instead rely on programs to interpret any information. I therefore support Searle’s position with regard to the Turing test. Moreover, Turing himself said this in his original paper, “the machine (programmed for playing the game) would not attempt to give the right answers to arithmetic problems. It would deliberately introduce mistakes in a manner calculate to confuse the interrogator (John R Searle 298).” This means that computers are prone to errors and can therefore lead to consistent errors if the program is not rectified and this is why it cannot be related to human minds. Another reason why computers can never be compared with human minds is the mistake of the machine giving too articulate responses and explanations to questions that a human mind will do intuitively. This therefore means that intelligence is not only based on language skills because we cannot separate the mind and the body. The Turing test needs to take into account other factors like the voice and human expressions to demonstrate intelligence. The systems reply (Berkeley) is the Searle’s response to the Chinese room experiment. Searle argues that even though the person locked in the room has no understanding of anything he is part of the system. Searle further argues that the man contains a large data bank since he has everything in the room. The man can decide to read and conceptualize all the data provided to him whether inside or outside the room and memorize them making him part of the system. Searle continues by saying that if the man fails to understand the whole system then the machines and the programs wouldn’t either since the man is part of the whole system. Searle believes that the mere manipulation of Chinese symbols with English words is not intelligence and that is why he thinks that those in support for strong AI will continue to do more research to prove their positions. Searle further suggest that strong AI must not be part of ideology and branch of psychology since strong AI is not able to distinguish mental abstracts from non-mental abstracts. In addition to this, Searle believes that psychology does not just deal with linguistic responses but also deals with the human mind and the processes, which leads to conclusions. Human beings have beliefs and this control their mental processes. It is therefore argued that since programs and computers have no believes they cannot be compared to human being. For this reason, those in support to strong AI must be able to think further and give conclusive evidences for including strong AI as a branch of psychology. Human beliefs determines and controls human behavior and changes the processes in the brain and this is why humans are prone to errors. The fact that programs and computers are super articulate and with minimal errors leaves something into question. Machines have no beliefs and therefore their performance and functions is not closely related to the functioning and performance of the human brain. The robot reply (Yale) suggests that a robot is fitted with arms and legs are programmed and a computer is placed inside to act like a brain. The robot is also fit with a television camera that assists it in seeing. The robot would then act like a human but will never be compared to a human brain. Searle argues that this concept is not any different from the previous one even though the robot is able to react to cognitive responses such a walking, seeing, and moving around. However, we should not forget that all these responses are under control of the computers program or the brain. Searle argues that this experiment is tacitly conceding the cognition and that it is not just a matter of formal symbol manipulation. Moreover, Searle argues that the fact that the robot is able to respond to perceptual and other motor capabilities it is still very vague and cannot be compared to human brain. Searle further proposes that if the same Chinese room experiment is done using the robot, then the responses will be similar since the computer program is still in play. In other words, the robot is just manipulating the information that is in its mind and therefore shows no understanding of either language. Searle further argues that even the person manipulating the robot using the computer has no understanding of what he/she is doing but just following the coded instructions required by the programs to make the robot perform its operations. The question is how the program learns how to manipulate the robot. The answer is simple. Just as a human being can store information in its brain and memorize it, the robots are able to do the same. They store information in their database and are bale to memorize it efficiently hence able to control the robots. Linguistic skills develop in human being and language acquisition is a slow process that begins after birth as the human interacts with the environment. In comparison to machines, language is not acquired though interaction with the environment but it is coded and installed as a program. Language acquisition in man enables movement and coordination of motor skills as interpretations come from the human brain. For this reason, it is impossible to separate human mind and the rest of the body. This is where the Turing test fails. The test separates the brain from other mental reactions. It is for this reason that humans are able to communicate even without writing or talking and can communicate using signs. Turing test fails to include this in its experiment and this is one of the shortcomings of this experiment. I therefore think that Searle has conclusively argued and proved that strong AI will never be equaled to human brain. I agree with Searle in this position based on the following conclusions from his work. First, human intelligence is not only measured using linguistic skills and therefore that does not make the Turing experiment vague but also inconclusive. In addition to this, computers and other machines have been programmed to give responses, which are so articulate and precise, a fact which is not applicable to human brain. The human brain is prone to errors even though very powerful considered to computer programs. In other words, language is not enough to capture all aspects of human intelligence and therefore more factors should be included. Searle has managed to conclusively express that computer programs have no basis of understanding and therefore the Turing test is not testing anything new but the human intelligence. This is because on one side, it is the human being who is manipulating the machine and on the other side, it is the human being under interrogation hence the test is not checking any artificial intelligence but human intelligence. In conclusion, Searle argues that mental states and events are literally a product of the operation of the brain but the program is not that way a product of the computers. Computers have no feelings and belief and therefore have no ability of cognition. Searle argues that human beings are able to do process information, which many people confuse with the ability of the computer to manipulate symbols. Works Cited John R Searle. Minds, Brains, and Programs. New York: University of California Berkeley, 1932. John R. Searle, Daniel Vanderveken. Foundations of Illocutionary Logic. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1985. Read More