Computers that can think, can doubt.
We have confirmed that computers can think.
We now know that we can make computers excel on limited problems such as recognizing speech (if it is grammatical, carefully pronounced and the context is restricted), scheduling a factory, recognizing a particular object in a scene, designing a jet engine, or even performing a complex medical diagnosis. But we are very far from creating a computer which can pass an unrestricted Turing Test -- even leaving aside Searle’s objections to the test. As one writer put it, “computers have mastered intellectual tasks, such as chess and integral calculus, but they have yet to attain the skills of a lobster in dealing with the real world.” Given the gap between these niche capabilities and the requirements of the unrestricted Turing Test, why do we think we can create an intelligent machine -- a machine which can pass the unrestricted Turing Test? Why do we think computers may have the “right stuff?” The reasons are among some of the most significant philosophical concepts of the late 20th century.
Do Computers Think? :: essays research papers - 123HelpMe
The philosophy which dominated thinking about the mind for almost three centuries is called Cartesian dualism; the position first set forth by the French mathematician and philosopher Rene Descartes in the early-1600's, that there are two kinds of substances in the world: mental and physical or immaterial “mind stuff” apart from material substance. If we held this belief today, there would be little reason to suppose we could make much progress creating intelligence using a computer. Today, most philosophers instead argue that the mind (and intelligence) is an emergent property of material processes at the micro-level. That is to say, intelligence, which includes thinking, arises from brain’s biochemistry, which is shaped by heredity and environment. The fundamental insight about biology and mind suggests that if we simulate the brain at the right level of detail, mind and intelligence may also emerge from the simulation. The open issue is how far down in the structure do we have to go? Can we get mind and intelligence by simulating brain processes at the higher “psychological” level -- how we read, for example -- or do we require lower-level neuro-physiological detail?
Fact file: Can a computer mark NAPLAN essays better than …
Turing replaces the question of whether computers can think with a more practical one: Is it imaginable that a computer could fool a human being, and be taken for a human being as well?
Can a computer really grade an essay
Why would computers have to be limited to means of communication such as language?
Maybe the concept of thinking can be defined in completely non-human ways.