Log in

No account? Create an account
You're going to hate me, but... - The Singularity

> Recent Entries
> Archive
> Friends
> Profile

March 5th, 2007

Previous Entry Share Next Entry
08:09 pm - You're going to hate me, but...
So I'm doing a research paper for my Philosophy course, regarding logical fallacies about whether or not computing power in any way, shape or form is comparable to the human brain. The entire course is on this, actually. Unfortunately, its not so simple. My professor isn't a big fan of futurism (I brought up Ray Kurzweil in a paper early and he was like "Ray... who?") or anything in anyway speculative. He likes concrete things.

That being said, I'm limited to Searle, Turing, Copeland, and Putnam. I need to think of a debatable thesis within the material, something that isn't in any really obscure sources (preferrably something within my subpar university library). I was thinking of advocating one of the more secure rebuttals to the Chinese Room argument other than Copeland's. I'm not really looking for help, because that's lame, more or less I need to be steered in the right direction, because I'm ever so lost. Any ideas?

(1 comment | Leave a comment)


Date:March 6th, 2007 05:58 pm (UTC)

off the top of my head...

My first thought, based on the top of my head is to do something akin to the "god of the gaps" argument for atheism.

Statements like "Computers will never be able to do X, which is the province of the human mind" are not uncommon. X could be "Play Chess" or "optical character recognition" or "natural language processing".

You could write a paper first outlining "their" argument that computers will never be equivalent to a human, since they can never do X, then pointing out how this is similar to past claims which have been successively disproven... it isn't a proof that strong AI is possible, but it does leave the other guy with little more than faith (in a soul, say) to go on.

> Go to Top