Artificial Intelligence and the Human Brain

Artificial intelligence has been at the center of many science fiction stories in the last fifty years. Some have become obsessed with proving or disproving the idea that computers can possess real minds, real consciousness. The latest take on this has been HBO's Westworld, a show about androids achieving consciousness. However, realistically many say this is an impossibility. While true artificial intelligence seems, unrealistic many have tried to actualize such a dream through AI projects and development of new, robotic technologies.

However, will the goal of real consciousness derived from artificial intelligence be achieved in the future? Will humanity ever possess the technology and understanding to cultivate life from machine? In "The Library of Toshiba" the chapter opens up with a quote from John Maynard Smith. He shares the notion that humans are just programmed robots designed to keep their genes going through copulation and breeding.

Humans are after all, part of creation and as such may be programmed by nature to perform certain tasks and functions like an artificial program. This appears as a jarring concept because it implies that if humans are like programs and can be programmed, what makes it any different from artificial intelligence? What makes humans different from robots? Dennett continues by stating programs are "not random strings of bits, but highly designed sequences of bits, the products of thousands of hours of R.

and D." (Dennet 437) This is important to understand because what appears like random chance or an act of randomness to a human being, may indeed be a potentially pre-programmed occurrence that was designed somehow, a long time ago. Dennet continues discussing his Toshiba and eventually goes back to Godel's Theorem and tries to compare once again humans with artificial intelligence, making it seem possible that humans and robots are the same and thus AI could develop into real consciousness.

"That is exactly what people in AI believe: that there are risky, heuristic algorithms for human intelligence in general, just as there are for playing good checkers and good chest and a thousand other tasks." (Dennet 438) Looking at AI through functionalism, early pioneers of AI thought of the human brain as the hardware and the human mind as the software. Eventually they began using examples such as running Microsoft Word program on numerous computers and comparing that to running the 'mind program' on any sort of hardware.

They convinced themselves that the human brain is a computer and because the mind is its program, this program can then be not only replicated, but also transferred into other machines like robots. This sounds reasonable and potentially insightful. However, the brain is not a computer. The human brain cannot be regarded as a non-deterministic analog system. There is no finite number of possibilities or possible states.

At least on a certain level, the human mind can store and process information in a multitude of ways that even research and analysis has yet to fully understand and map. Add to that the tens of thousands of years of evolution that enabled humans to reach the level of intelligence they have today, it seems as though computers are just not the same as human brains, but rather one, small characteristic.

Many who creating counterarguments against computers eventually having real consciousness use the Chinese room argument to effectively refute such notion. A John Searle thought experiment in 1980 and its 1984 derivation, it is the most well-known credited counters to potential claims for AI. The main claims of the Chinese room arguments are 'syntax does not suffice for semantics' and 'brains cause minds'. Searle uses strong AI and weak AI to describe how computers can simulate thought much like a weather simulator can simulate weather, but not truly understand it.

That while AI can (with the right programs), understand and possess other cognitive states, it cannot understand on its own and thus removes the potential for real consciousness. This is like what was discussed in Westworld. While the 'hosts' could replicate human emotion, and be programmed to understand things like conversation and objectives, they could not understand on their own what their thoughts were or the idea of having their own thoughts.

Although the show eventually allowed one host, Dolores, to achieve real consciousness, those that refute the possibilities of AI, use the Chinese room claims to refute that from ever happening. Going back to the Dennett text, Dennett continues laying the foundation for understanding artificial intelligence by using the chest metaphor. Chess exists as a finite game. He explains out of all the possibilities, it will either be a draw or a win for either black or white.

While the algorithm for perfect chess exists, the tree of potentials is so vast, it would take too much effort and time to create it, thus removing a feasible algorithm. Does artificial intelligence seem like a complex structure when it could be the same as a chess game? Can the potential outcomes be so vast that it seems like it can replicate and mimic the human mind? This line of reasoning can even be used as a counter-argument.

Is the human mind similar and if so, would a feasible algorithm exist for it? Dennett continues exploration of the algorithm through discussion of mathematicians and their thoughts on such a topic.

"They are interested in proving, for instance, that there is some algorithm with some interesting property, or that there is no such algorithm, and in order to prove such things you needn't actually locate the algorithm you are talking about." (Dennett 441) If human thought, human action, can be turned into a feasible algorithm, can then the pursuit of real consciousness for computers be possible? While discussion over whether the human brain can lead to the idea that it can be rebuilt or replicated as a computer has been refuted, it is interesting to try to encapsulate the realm of possibility within the understanding of algorithms and humanity's attempt to turn anything into data.

Recent innovations in technology has led to the revisiting of artificial intelligence. Because while the Chinese room argument holds weight for those wishing to counter argue the possibility of artificial intelligence, the technology in the 1980's.