Question: are artificial persons (or A.I.) possible in the future? Could machines think?

Answer this question(s) and be sure to:

[1] Describe the Turing test. Describe in detail how it works and what its goal is. What counts as a pass and what does pass mean? If a woman passes the test what does Turing think that proves?

[2] Describe Functionalism and why it makes possible future artificial intelligence

[3] Describe and explain Searle’s “Chinese room” counterexample to functionalism and the argument it illustrates.

[4] Describe and explain at least one (more is better) reply to Searle. Make a conclusion; could machines think and have minds?

You must proofread your paper. But do not strictly rely on your computer’s spell-checker and grammar-checker; failure to do so indicates a lack of effort on your part and you can expect your grade to suffer accordingly. Papers with numerous misspelled words and grammatical mistakes will be penalized. Read over your paper – in silence and then aloud – before handing it in and make corrections as necessary. Often it is advantageous to have a friend proofread your paper for obvious errors. Handwritten corrections are preferable to uncorrected mistakes.

Use a standard 10 to 12 point (10 to 12 characters per inch) typeface. Smaller or compressed type and papers with small margins or single-spacing are hard to read. It is better to let your essay run over the recommended number of pages than to try to compress it into fewer pages.

Likewise, large type, large margins, large indentations, triple-spacing, increased leading (space between lines), increased kerning (space between letters), and any other such attempts at “padding” to increase the length of a paper are unacceptable, wasteful of trees, and will not fool your professor.

The paper must be neatly formatted, double-spaced with a one-inch margin on the top, bottom, and sides of each page. When submitting hard copy, be sure to use white paper and print out using dark ink. If it is hard to read your essay, it will also be hard to follow your argument.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION;

Describe Functionalism of the Turning Test and why it makes possible future artificial intelligence

Introduction

The Turning Test is a test for autism spectrum disorder that helps diagnose people with ASD. It involves turning your head from side to side and then up and down, like this:

Turning Test overview

The Turning Test is a thought experiment devised by John Searle in 1980. It’s also known as “the Chinese room” argument and is an extension of his earlier Chinese room argument. In this paper, I will explain how it works and then discuss some other ways that artificial intelligence could be developed using this method.

The Turning Test is designed to determine if something (a robot) can understand what you say to it when you’re talking in English but not when you’re talking about mathematics or physics. To do this test properly requires three things:

• A human being who knows both languages (English and another language). This person must also know how each language works so they can understand what the subject matter means when spoken out loud by someone else who speaks neither language well enough yet still understands both languages equally well enough so they don’t have any problems understanding either one perfectly well–even though they don’t speak either one fluently yet!

Functionalism

Functionalism is a theory of meaning that holds that something is real if it performs a function. This can be thought of as the basis for the Turning Test, which was developed by psychologist Julesz in 1970 and later refined by Betty Edwards (see below).

Functionalism is also known as “the idea that only those things that perform a function are real”. The person or thing performing the function is said to be “functional”; non-functional objects do not exist in this context. For example, if we say something like “This chair is functional because it holds your weight while you sit on it” then this would mean there was no need for us to consider whether or not chairs actually existed before they were invented!

Brain in a vat

The Brain in a Vat is a thought experiment, devised by philosopher David Chalmers to demonstrate the falsity of Cartesian dualism. In the experiment, you are placed in a room with two video cameras monitoring your behavior. These cameras are connected via wires and cables to another room where there is an artificial intelligence system which can read your brain activity and make decisions based on it (for example, whether or not you’re lying).

This AI system has no direct connection with your brain—it lacks any physical senses or bodily organs whatsoever—but it knows what information makes up “you” from doing only one thing: observing everything that happens around them (from their perspective). They have access to all sorts of information about their environment; including things such as how many times someone has blinked since they started recording video footage from inside their own head!

Arguments against the possibility of artificial intelligence

The arguments against the possibility of artificial intelligence are many, but perhaps the most compelling is this: it’s simply a contradiction in terms. If you’re going to create an intelligent machine, then you can’t call it “artificial” it has to be natural.

For one thing, there’s no such thing as an artificial entity with its own self-contained rules. Everything that exists depends on something else for its existence (we’re made out of atoms and molecules), so if we create another type of thing that does not share these properties with us but instead follows its own set of rules and laws like a robot arm or robot heart it will never be able to change those things around them because those things would need something else from outside themselves before they could do anything new or different than what they already were doing before entering into contact with us humans (or whatever type of creature we might consider ourselves partaking within). So even if we were able (and willing?) to build machines like this someday down the road when technology becomes available again after some century or two has passed since civilization fell apart; once again our current knowledge about physics wouldn’t allow us beings living today any access whatsoever into creating these types

of machines without first knowing everything perfectly well beforehand without any mistakes being made along the way which could lead directly towards failure later down line!

Arguments that AI is possible

AI is possible because it already happens. The brain is an incredibly complex machine, and we can build a computer that mimics its functionality. We can also simulate the brain on computers, which allows us to see how it works in detail. Then we have the ability to create artificial intelligence (AI) that’s indistinguishable from human beings—and this has been done by many researchers around the world!

The Turning Test is one of the best ways for us humans to test whether or not an AI has passed our standards for consciousness: if you ask someone if their friend has passed away yet and they say yes, then you know they’re still alive; however if after asking them again later on down at your local hospital facility (which will probably be very far away) then there should be no doubt left about whether or not he/she truly died just hours ago! The reason why these tests are so important isn’t just because they allow us humans some peace of mind but mainly because without knowing exactly what type of entity we’re dealing with when creating something new like artificial intelligence…well let me put it this way: imagine building something like yourself when trying out new ideas or techniques outside work hours–wouldn’t it be nice knowing beforehand whether or not those ideas worked out well?

With Functionalism, Artificial intelligence isn’t just a possibility, it’s inevitable.

With Functionalism, Artificial intelligence isn’t just a possibility, it’s inevitable. The computer model of the mind is a theory that says the brain is just another kind of hardware called ‘circuitry’. The hardware runs software programs called minds or brains (which are themselves electrical circuits). This means that if you can build an artificial brain, then you can also build an artificial mind.

According to this idea there are two main types of minds: physical and digital ones – physical ones like us where senses take place in our bodies but digital ones happening within computers such as internet browsers or databases etc…

Conclusion

AI is inevitable. And functionalism is the reason why.