requestId:68499addecacc4.78640513.
Reflect on the development of artificial intelligence from the perspective of Chinese philosophy[1]
Author: Bai Tongdong
Source: Author Authorized by Confucian Network Published
Original from “Zhongzhou Journal” Issue 9, 2019
Time: Confucius was in the 2570 year of the year Gengxu on October 13, 13th of Jihai
Jesus November 9, 2019
Abstract
Although the progress of artificial intelligence represented by Alfago and others has far surpassed our imagination of the tasks that machines can accomplish in the era of automation, today’s artificial intelligence does not have any intelligence, and its concern for strengthening artificial intelligence is simply unfair. However, reflection on strong artificial intelligence can still promote our exploration of some of the most basic human problems – such as intelligence and human beings. From the perspective of Chinese philosophy, the concern about whether strong artificial intelligence can replace and destroy humans can bring prejudice to Eastern civilization. However, Mencius’s understanding of people’s existence also has problems. In the challenge of existing artificial intelligence, what we should strengthen is not creative teaching, but basic and advanced teaching that takes hard memory of death and training methods based on questions and exams. The development of artificial intelligence can strengthen economic dissatisfaction, etc., and the solution to this must also be solved by strengthening the responsibility and responsibilities of elites and their decisions in politics, which happens to be a contribution of Confucian political philosophy.
Keywords
Artificial Intelligence � With the dazzling development of Intelligence technology, especially AlphaGo, which makes people unable to believe in the victory, makes the cat look clean and clean, and should not be a wandering cat. Perhaps the topic of whether people from home can be controlled, replaced, or even killed by artificial intelligence has become a hot topic. Although such amazing technological developments are available, the first thing I want to say is that artificial intelligence is not very intelligent, and there is not even a little intelligence. Although Alfado defeated the best chess player in the world, anyone can win it – just choose to play Chinese chess with it. Of course, if it starts to learn Chinese chess, it can quickly defeat us, but weYou can beat it again – just choose to play shuttlecock with it. In general, one of the focus features of human intelligence is that it can do tasks that are not designed in advance, while Alfago and other existing AI products can only do tasks that they are designed in advance (although they can do well, even surpass humans). Therefore, we can say that there is no existing artificial intelligence.
Alva Noë, a philosopher who teaches at american, California, Berkeley, has a good idea of this (2014). The clock does not really understand time, but we humans use it to distinguish time. Similar to this, the AI so far has only been used by us humans to do those (to use) intelligent tasks. Noë points out: “Even the simplest life sentiment, like the Amoeba, also shows some kind of intelligence, autonomy, creativity, which even goes beyond the strongest computer.” According to Noë, the reason why Amoeba is smarter is that it can change and create its preservation environment for itself. Maybe some people will say that today’s artificial intelligence can do this. I think, more accurately, the uniqueness of Amoeba is that it does not have a designer in personality, or even if it does, this designer does not give it a specific task, but a vague command like “seeking saving”. Humans go further along this unique feature. It can be said that if we were designed, we were designed to exceed any (fixed or specific) design.
I hereby undeniably the magic of Alfago and other artificial intelligence advancements. Many people originally thought that after the phone was switched off, the little girl started to use short videos again. Song Wei asked with concern: The instrument (including artificial intelligence) is just good at mechanical tasks, that is, tasks with clear rules and specific French styles, that is, the so-called automation. For tasks like chess, machines cannot do so by experience, heaven, tacit knowledge, etc. Alfago proves that our confidence is wrong. However, the chess is still a specific task, with clear rules and some basic strategies, and most importantly, its winnings are clearly defined and do not require human external judgments and determinations (this machine can learn quickly and efficiently). Therefore, AlphaGo’s victory has forced us to admit that machines (including artificial intelligence) can do any specific, well-definitive task, even without mechanical steps to follow to complete this task. However, AlphaGo has no intelligence in its meaning: it has no choice but to grasp the chess, it is our human choice for it.
Of course, some people will say that we should still really gain intelligence for artificial intelligence—That is, artificial intelligence (AI) became the so-called powerful artificial intelligence (AGI)—was ready the day. Sincerely, humans are very lame in predicting the future. Artificial intelligence began to develop in the 20th century, but breakthrough progress only occurred. Ten years ago, most people believed that nano and biotechnology were the target of technological development, and few people realized the grand progress of artificial intelligence. Unfortunately, we humans can only apply our (often misguided) past experience and very infinite intelligence to help us prepare for the future. Now it seems that more clear and forced challenges for humans come from problems like gene editing and climate heat, rather than strong artificial intelligence. Compared with the obvious urgency of the former, it is simply a shame to reflect on the challenge of strong artificial intelligence on humans.
However, this does not mean that reflecting on the problem of strong artificial intelligence has no meaning. Two (has been?) popular topics in the British and American philosophical world are about zombies and time watching. If we know that zombie movies and the Back to the Future series were very popular in the 80s, we can laugh at them that these philosophers seem to have found their research topics from the stylist movies. People with normal energy will not feel that they will really encounter zombies, and time viewing only exists in science fiction movies, it is just a mathematical energy. There is almost no physicist who believes that in the nearer or even farther future, time viewing has any real energy. However, sympathetic to reflect on these seemingly boring and even absurd topics can still have philosophical meanings because it can show some problems that were originally hidden. Similarly, even if the truly intelligent powerful artificial intelligence is far away from heaven, we can still ask whether our thinking about it can make us discover some major and interesting topics. In fact, the following statement that “there is no intelligence today” can be the result of such a reflection, that is, the admiration of (in fact, it is still very remote) of strong artificial intelligence, which has forced us to respond to the question of why human intelligence is.
2.Strong artificial intelligence and medium-sized Caiming priceNational Philosophy: Create super humans?
There are already many philosophical reflections on various challenges to strengthening artificial intelligence and artificial intelligence. In this article, I will focus on the perspectives related to Chinese philosophy and thinking to reflect on its challenges. First, in terms of the attitude towards strengthening artificial intelligence, in american, the public is concerned about strengthening artificial intelligence and other technologies.Progress is often full of fear, but in East Asia, the public seems to be even more welcoming about the development of science and technology. If my observations are indeed factual, then a sufficient explanation is that modern science has developed in the East first, and in the process of pursuing, Dongya is very able to generate scientific (non-scientific, non-sensual) respect. In Eastern Asia, “science” and “good” become synonyms. Another reason for this is the creation myth of Christianity. According to this myth, only God can create man. But in Eastern Asian tradition, there is no such creation myth. Divergent Gods and even people can participate in the process of creating and forming human beings. Human beings will create the existence of human beings, and Eastern Asians are better able to accept this ability than Easterners, because even secular Easterners can still be influenced by Christianity during their growth. At the same time, with this creation myth and the world’s great destruction, [2] provides the “blue picture” of thinking for Orientals on the advancement of technology to provide the “blue picture” of thinking with Easterners’ civilization and traditions, and also makes contributions to East (Asia)’s thoughtful response to artificial intelligence.
Another problem here is, in what sense do we cultivate an exis
No Responses