Difference between revisions of "Intelligence"
(→Full Title or Meme) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==Full Title or Meme== | ==Full Title or Meme== | ||
| − | + | The ability to acquire and apply knowledge and skills. | |
==Context== | ==Context== | ||
| − | [t | + | [t might be argued that there is a fundamental contradiction in the idea of a |
machine with intelligence. It is certainly true that 'acting like a machine', has | machine with intelligence. It is certainly true that 'acting like a machine', has | ||
become synonymous with lack of adaptability. But the reason for this is obvious. | become synonymous with lack of adaptability. But the reason for this is obvious. | ||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
of the machine having any discretion. The argument might however be put into | of the machine having any discretion. The argument might however be put into | ||
more aggressive form. It has for instance been shown that with certain logical | more aggressive form. It has for instance been shown that with certain logical | ||
| − | systems there can be no machine which will distinguish provable formulae of | + | systems there can be no machine which will distinguish provable formulae of the |
| − | + | system from unprovable, i.e. that there is no test that the machine can apply which | |
ill divide propositions with certainty into these two classes. Thus if a machine | ill divide propositions with certainty into these two classes. Thus if a machine | ||
made for this purpose it must in some cases fail to give an answer. On the other | made for this purpose it must in some cases fail to give an answer. On the other | ||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
decision about any given formula. This would be the argument. Against it I would | decision about any given formula. This would be the argument. Against it I would | ||
say that fair play must be given to the machine. Instead of it sometimes giving n | say that fair play must be given to the machine. Instead of it sometimes giving n | ||
| − | answer we could arrange that it gives occasional wrong answers. But the | + | answer we could arrange that it gives occasional wrong answers. But the human |
mathematician would likewise make blunders when trying out new techniques. | mathematician would likewise make blunders when trying out new techniques. | ||
It is easy for us to regard these blunders as not counting and give him another | It is easy for us to regard these blunders as not counting and give him another | ||
| − | chance, but the machine would probably be allowed no mercy. In other | + | chance, but the machine would probably be allowed no mercy. In other words |
then, if a machine is expected to be infallible, it cannot also be intelligent.<ref>Alan M. Turing, ''Lecture to the London Mathematical Society'' (1947-02-20) https://www.vordenker.de/downloads/turing-vorlesung.pdf</ref> | then, if a machine is expected to be infallible, it cannot also be intelligent.<ref>Alan M. Turing, ''Lecture to the London Mathematical Society'' (1947-02-20) https://www.vordenker.de/downloads/turing-vorlesung.pdf</ref> | ||
==References== | ==References== | ||
| + | |||
| + | [[Category: Artificial Intelligence]] | ||
Revision as of 15:11, 8 July 2024
Full Title or Meme
The ability to acquire and apply knowledge and skills.
Context
[t might be argued that there is a fundamental contradiction in the idea of a machine with intelligence. It is certainly true that 'acting like a machine', has become synonymous with lack of adaptability. But the reason for this is obvious. Machines in the past have had very little storage, and there has been no question of the machine having any discretion. The argument might however be put into more aggressive form. It has for instance been shown that with certain logical systems there can be no machine which will distinguish provable formulae of the system from unprovable, i.e. that there is no test that the machine can apply which ill divide propositions with certainty into these two classes. Thus if a machine made for this purpose it must in some cases fail to give an answer. On the other hand if a mathematician is confronted with such a problem he would search around and find new methods of proof, so that he ought eventually to be able to reach decision about any given formula. This would be the argument. Against it I would say that fair play must be given to the machine. Instead of it sometimes giving n answer we could arrange that it gives occasional wrong answers. But the human mathematician would likewise make blunders when trying out new techniques. It is easy for us to regard these blunders as not counting and give him another chance, but the machine would probably be allowed no mercy. In other words then, if a machine is expected to be infallible, it cannot also be intelligent.[1]
References
- ↑ Alan M. Turing, Lecture to the London Mathematical Society (1947-02-20) https://www.vordenker.de/downloads/turing-vorlesung.pdf
