A.I.: ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE OR AUTOMATED IMBECILITY?
CAN MACHINES THINK AND FEEL?
A lecture by
Valdemar W. Setzer
Dept. of Computer Science, Univ. of São Paulo, Brazil
www.ime.usp.br/~vwsetzer
– this version: Jan. 10, 2022
See the ppt presentation
of this lecture, and abstract,
paper, book
ASSESSMENTS BY PARTICIPANTS
(Waiting for further responses)
1. Jan. 9, 2022, remote lecture for the MysTech organization, and
interested people. Info: Andrew Linnell jandrewtogetherlinnell att gmail
dot com. Questions: [1] What were the most important things that you have
learned? [2] What are the biggest remaining doubts? [3] Comments. [4]
What is your degree of satisfaction with this lecture? (1 - very unsatisfied,
5 - very satisfied: 2%; 4 - 25%; 3 - 25%). [5] Did
you learn new things? (YR yes, relevant: 100%, YN yes, not relevant: 0%;
NO 0%). My comments are preceeded by COMM.
- [1] I was surprised about 50% people surveyed thought humans were
machines. Lecture was very thorough. [2] I have no doubt that machines
are not human -it is the machine that makes interpretations that can
affect me greatly and with which I cannot reason is horrifying. When
man gives up his rights to machine it will/is scary. [3] Many want the
comfort of machine and blindly follow what they are told. The ones running
the machine put value on the human. Machines have no feeling/sensations
but many people are emulating the machine with no feeling/sensations
as they dull from tv, etc. Robots are being made now with facial expressions
which will make us feel like they have thoughts. Yes, machines dont
think /feel but we will be taught to believe that they do. The machine
can make faces as it scans and makes assessments of our bodily functions-fooling
us to believe that they are human-like. [4] 4. [5] YR. COMM.:
Those about 50% were almost all college students. This is probably due
to the fact that in general basic and college education tries to force
students to be materialists - their teachers and professors are. Note
that many people belong to religious confessions but think only materialistically,
that is, they think only in physical terms. Please note that no machine
of instrument is neutral. Take a hammer in you hand. What do you think?
On hammering nails and other things, that is, violent actions. You don't
think in caressing someone with the hammer. Take a pillow in your hands.
What do you think? On calm, rest, relaxation. In fact, nothing is
neutral in relation to human beings, because we incorporate all our
experiences, and they end up influencing ourselves, even if just slightly.
The way to react against the influence of machines is using them consciously
and for the good. What is destroying nature and humans (including psychological
influences)? Religions fundamentalism? No, but bad uses of technology!
Give a look at my paper "The mision of technology":
https://www.ime.usp.br/~vwsetzer/technol-mission.html
In particular, results of Machine "Learning" systems that
affect humans or society should only be used after having been examined
by some persons. For instance, medical diagnosis. Yes, robots can mimic
our facial expressions, but they feel absolutely nothing and, as I showed,
will never have sensations and feelings. People will believe they are
human-like if they don't understand how they work - and how humans work!
- [1] the difference between the function of a syntax machine and understanding.
the generation of parameters in "machine learning" and the
lack of transparency in how results are generated. [2] how to effectively
describe the mental health issues that cause some to posit that machines
can think and feel and eventually surpass human capabilities with creativity.
[3] very illuminating and well presented and organized. [4] 5. [5] YR.
COMM. There is a mystery in the fact that it is impossible to
prove physically in detail what we think, feel and will. I think there
is a mystery here. This preserves our freedom. For instance, if it would
be possible to prove physically that humans have non-physical members,
everybody would be forced to admit that there are non-physical phenomena.
This leaves to each human the possibility of freely choosing what I
call "Fundamental existential hypothesis": there are only
physical matter and processes in the world, or there also exist non-physical
"matter" and processes. After freely adopting one of them,
the person should think and act accordingly, that is, being coherent.
Fortunately, most materialists are not coherent, e.g. they admit free
will, which makes no physical sense. But I think my arguments can be
expounded to everyone.
- [1] That freedom can be found in thinking by choices we have if I
understood properly. [2-3] [Nothing] [4] 5. [5] YR. COMM.: Thinking
may be used as a means of experiencing free will, e.g. by consciously
choosing between two different possibilities (as in my example of imagining
two arbitrary numbers on a display, and then concentrating the thoughts
on the image of just in one) that have nothing to do with past experience,
inner impulses, etc. One has to have the sensation that nothing imposes
the choice of the chosen number. Materialists will argue that our unconscious
determines which number to choose. But this is an unprovable statement,
a speculation. Physically, where is the unconscious and how it affects
us? Our experience is that we are really free in choosing the number
to imagine.
- [1] wow, the % of people who believe that humans are machines! [2]
the speed and unquestioning ramping up of tech and virtual reality.
the concerns for youth ... shocking to learn how many parents took their
children to see the films you mentioned. [3] [Nothing]. [4] 3. [5] YR.
COMM.: See the comments to assessment 1. One should recognize
the efforts made by our "civilization" to impose the materialist
conception of the world and of humans. I consider the two films (AI
and The bicentennial man) actions in this direction. In particular,
those efforts are being concentrated on children and adolescents (case
of AI). That's one of the influences of electronic media. I'm
surprised that I could not find an English translation of the extraordinary
book by neuroscientist Michel Desmurget La fabrique du crétin
digital (The factory of digital imbeciles) - I read the original,
have its translation into Portuguese (it does not contain the postface)
and found on Amazon only translations into Spanish and Italian. I wonder
if it contradicts so much what most people think about electronic media
that no American press is interested in publishing it
:
https://www.amazon.com/Books-Michel-Desmurget/s?rh=n%3A283155%2Cp_27%3AMichel+Desmurget
|