Artificial Intelligence In 1997 an IBM computer named “Deep Blue” defeated the world’s Grand Chess Champion Gary Kasparov. At the time it was hailed as a great achievement. Some began to wonder if machines were becoming “smarter” than people. It is a safe bet, however, that neither Alan Turing nor John Searle was impressed. Both Turing (1964) and Searle (1980) challenged the idea that artificial intelligence or computers can actually think in the sense that humans can. Each attacked the notion of computers sharing human intelligence in a different way. Turing created what has been called the “Turing Test” a theoretical method for deciding if a computer [or some other subject] was human or capable of human thinking based on behavior (...The end:
.....computers work, their capabilities, their ability to “learn” and the end results of memory size that he could not even conceive of impact on the ability of computers. Further, advances in biology, genetics and anthropology negate other assumptions. In terms of Searle, lessons from a fictional 23rd Century world and basic fallacies in the logic of his two primary scenarios (the hamburger and the Chinese questions) bring his arguments similarly into question. Any philosophical argument that leads to a false conclusion is sophistry. The abilities of computers today, what we have learned about the workings of the human brain and the expectations we hold for computers in the future all throw Searle’s conclusions into question. Are savants human?