I need to make a few statements really quick an then we'll get back to the original topic Freddy posted...
I totally disagree with the quoting of my replies and the idea that scientific evidence of my state of being could be somehow inaccurate.
I agree that we shouldn't make mountains out of molehills. This thread when on (quoting me even more after that) when it should not have.
As moderator and as a man (despite my being physically female), I'll do two things:
1. Humbally apologize for my first response to this post, which I realize a man may think I thought men are unintelligent. I am of the personal opinion that men and women alike can think, as they are both sentient beings. I even think animals can think. So technically, I should not have said what I said in the way I said it.
2. Due to the woman references, I think it's best we not discuss THAT topic any longer here, as I do not want women or even FTM (Female to Male) transgendered people or those who are both, or like me, brain one, body another to feel unwelcome. This forum is for EVERYONE. Including JMan, Dan, and everyone else here. Everyone is welcome and should feel welcome.
So since we are in disagreement over some things here, let's do what I remember we used to do in my GEnie online services days: Agree to disagree and say no more on the disagreement we had here.
Now, as for Freddy's original quote, if I may rephrase my response:
(Quoting Freddy)
B. F. Skinner
"The real problem is not whether machines think but whether men do."
(End quote)
This is interesting because humans program the machines to begin with. In other debates here, I have noted that it might even be possible that a machine may overrule it's own programming. Thus, I think, the programmer's ability to program an AI to learn from it's environment and interaction with others is the only thing required to make the AI "live" as such. After that, just as a parent raises a child, the child grows, learns and after the learning (ie. programming) process, it's on it's own. Whether the child continues to follow the rules of their upbringing or not is then the child's sole decision upon adulthood. And not every adult follows their upbringing so what the parents "thought" or whether the parents can "think" really can become irrelevant.
For example, parents that severely (and sadly) abuse their children. There are those abused kids that grow to adulthood, marry and have kids. I've heard from many of them that they would NEVER treat their child the way their parents treated them. Some of the things the parents did to them was obvious that the parents weren't "thinking", as such.
So, the programmer's ability to "think" would be irrelevant I beleive. But I do believe all humans and animals can and do think. All sentient life with some type of brain or processing center has the ability to think. But maybe the question is HOW they think?
For example; a person with mental retardation who can not communicate or interact well (if at all) with those around them. But sit them in front of a piano and they can play such beautiful music! Some have other talents as well. I have read where the human brain of some mentally retarded people would develop so that what is missing in one area of the brain may become enhanced in another area of the brain.
Thought, ability to think, to reason of the creator. IS that a factor for a creation to become what it is?
Now we are back on topic.... Let's see what we can come up with.
