Dreyfus brings philosophy to the rescue of humanity, namely, and ironically, Martin Heidegger. Though Heidegger was mostly indebted to his teacher and mentor Edmund Husserl, Dreyfus treats him as some sort of savior of mankind. No need, for William James’ Principles of Psychology, which predates Being and Time by almost forty years, could have done just as well in proving why computers can’t think. James’ work on consciousness and attention greatly influenced Husserl and the birth of phenomenology. Had Dreyfus deferred his argument to James instead of the Nazi Heidegger, he might have gotten more respect from the AI researchers. James’ criticism of the “automaton theory” of the mind is much more convincing than Heidegger’s dull notions about hammers.
In drawing attention to his muse Heidegger, Dreyfus is very critical of the philosophical tradition, which relied primarily on reason. Yet reason, which Dreyfus does not define, is the central focus of his argument for being human. His method is primarily his ability to doubt that computers can think, i.e., I can’t think, therefore, I can’t be human. Is this the tradition in disguise or what?
Of course, his argument goes much deeper than just thinking, which computers do best in the form of calculating, etc. It has to do with their inability to function in the world like humans, which is more of a problem for robots than computers per se.
Humans are prone to make mistakes, especially when confronted with new environments or handling complex systems like spacecraft. Engineers must design systems in ways to question the appropriateness of human behavior. Is it safe to do such a thing at this time? Of critical importance in the whole study of AI is not whether computers can do what humans do, but whether computers can support, correct, and enhance what humans do.
Fifty years from now when science moves information processing from the digital to the molecular level, new forms of knowledge will emerge, which will be a call to philosophers to reinvent the tradition and reawaken interest in Plato, Descartes, and Kant. Then some philosophy professor will write a book titled Why Computers Can Think And Man Still Can’t and end the debate.
Loading your book clubs
There was a problem loading your book clubs. Please try again.
Not in a club? Learn more
Join or create book clubs
Choose books together
Track your books
Bring your club to Amazon Book Clubs, start a new book club and invite your friends to join, or find a club that’s right for you for free.
Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required. Learn more
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
Flip to back Flip to front
Follow the Author
Something went wrong. Please try your request again later.
Frequently bought together
- +
- +
Total price:
To see our price, add these items to your cart.
Choose items to buy together.
Customers who viewed this item also viewed
Page 1 of 1 Start overPage 1 of 1
About the author
Follow authors to get new release updates, plus improved recommendations.
Top reviews from other countries
AmazonCustomer
This critique of AI is still valid today and it is a must read
Reviewed in Canada on August 27, 2018Giuseppe Flavio Artese
The starting point for those that want to understand what embodied knowledge is about
Reviewed in Germany on February 11, 2022
