The Case of Artificial Intelligence in Debate of Philosopher Auguste Comte’s Categorization of Human

47
6978

The famous philosopher Auguste Comte classified nineteenth-century human thought into three categories only; Religious thought, scientific thought and philosophical thought. But is it really the only types of fonts the man is capable of? Many would disagree and this is an ongoing debate in Western philosophy. Many think that these classifications are too simplistic.

Now, then, by using these simplistic categories for Artificial Intelligence, which is based on human thought, because it was necessary to solve a human problem to create it, its action therefore depends on human thought, but it does not know not faith. Artificial intelligence knows only the priorities and therefore it is limited to thinking that only one category does not appear in any category. Yet, if you broaden the definition, you could say that it fits only one category; Scientist?

Priorities have reasons, but an AI computer does not reason, but if it establishes priorities, it is the reasoning in this case and therefore the use of philosophical thought. So, one could argue that an AI computer uses two categories. And programming has "absolutes", so of faith. If we define human thought in this way, then Artificial Intelligence is possible and will pass through human thought through the same methods.

Or artificial intelligence is a human thought. If this is the case, human thinking is that of systems and methods, and "what it is that the human being" is ill defined, and humans are organic machines, using the razor of Ockham this observable. So, humans are organic machines, but that goes against Auguste Comte's belief system.

So, either he was wrong and did not think about it, either his belief system caused an error in his theory because his mind could not conceive that man would become God instead of robots or humans. ;artificial intelligence. questions to answer, so we have to bring him back to life and put him into judgment? You see, if human thought is a system of thought and we consider the full scope of what Auguste Comte theorized. That's to say that; The religious is knowing how to give priority to "faith"; philosophical thought is to know prioritize the "reasons"; and scientific knowledge gives priority to "proofs", then such a system will dictate human thinking and we must reclassify humans as self-replicating carbon-based organisms (brain machines) or organic brains l & # 39; AI.

Or artificial intelligence as a human being. So, are humans really alive or are they programmed machines and / or is artificial intelligence identical to the human mind and so is man now God? Indeed, if we agree that Auguste Comte creates only these classifications, then we box in our thoughts, they do not think any more.

However, one could also argue that too many rules also stop the thought process, call it the bureaucracy of the mind. Thus, the most sophisticated artificial intelligence computer would think less and become less innovative, while less complex programming would be more free to reason. Simplicity builds complexity and complexity results in simplicity.

(See Lance Winslow's "Allegory of a baseball in an aircraft hangar" around 2007)

Now, using these rules or thought classifications, human beings really think, reason and / or solve problems. Especially considering that "Faith" is an absolute causing boundaries. So these "Faith or Absolute" are "rules" as in an AI computer. The addition of rules increases the proximity of results or expected responses. There is therefore less reflection, less reason, a more linear problem solving.

We know that in human societies, too many rules stifle innovation, so that these systems of thought or human rules lead to a limitation of human thought. Thus, for unlimited thought to be realized, the rules, categories, and boundaries of regulated thought must be discarded to achieve unlimited thought, regardless of the philosophy subscribed to or the categories chosen to describe the process.

What you say? Tell you what? Dolphins also think? Count, he says without knowing it, because of its linearity, that the species of this planet all use a system-type thinking? So, there is no real thought here on Earth based on his own comments and observations of his own thoughts and conclusions. I'm disappointed.

I certainly hope this article is interesting and that it has propelled thinking. The goal is simple. to help you in your quest to be the best in 2007. Thank you for reading my many articles on various topics that interest you.


Comments are closed.