Because of its practical solution, it equates intelligent behavior with human behavior. Humans can display extremely unintelligent behavior (like hitting their computer and thinking it helps).
And who says that human intelligence or the human way of thinking is the only way of thinking?
My opinion is that, according to this definition, computers can think. You say it’s just programmed to do that, if no one programmed it wouldn’t be able to do that. Your teacher or parent’s or someone taught it to you. So you think that programing is different than learning.
So does this mean that if you can think does this mean you have a mind?
Well would you be able to think if you could not hear, touch, see, smell, or taste anything and as such could receive no information. Another couple of definition brought up in a conversation was that in order to survive something must be able to think and that the ability to come up with original ideas was proof that something can think.
The Calgary professor mentioned earlier also took these robots (without microprocessors) and gave them solar panels so they could get their own energy.
So once again they can think according to a definition of ‘to think’.
My dad felt that a computer would not be able to think because if you put it in a room and never used it, it wouldn’t be able to think.
Well this has been a subject of much debate between even the greatest minds, and yet there is still no answer. Well that is what we are going to set to answer and I think yes, depending on your definition of thinking. When I refer to computers in this essay I am not referring only to the microprocessor sitting on your desk but to microprocessors that control robots of various structure. (Well actually he does it because he has a hard head).
First of all I have would like you to answer a question. Yet a professor in Calgary builds robots that do not even contain a microprocessor yet it can learn.