week 6 functionalism and artificial Intelligence

Some philosophers, including John Searle, say that computers are not really intelligent. Rather, they just simulateintelligence. However, it could be argued that, just as computers are programmed to respond in different ways to different commands, so human beings are 'programmed' by society, and education, to perform certain tasks. For example, we are programmed to do complicated things like speak a language, as well as more simply things like brush our teeth. What are your thoughts on this comparison? Is there any difference between the programming of computers, and the 'programming' of humans by society?    I don't think we can put those in a same chart. Even though, It could be argued that way, like we 'learn things' as computers are 'programmed'. see? It's very simple the difference seems to appear as a paper thin but it is not.     We, human beings, people 'learn things' in our own ways. In other words, we directly experience new things and are able to choose what to take from those memories and also choose what's gonna be or do in the future and human beings will respond in so many different ways to one same occasion.     Obviously, we have a sense and consciousness which computers don't have. they just work as programmed, they can't even choose to know or change the response from the manual no matter how perfect it is. and manual, it is designed by human being anyway... So they just look like they think and respond as we do it according to our sense and consciousness.  Therefore, we can't say computer is intelligent.

week 5 Dualism and Physicalism

Should we, as human beings, think of ourselves as made out of two different substances, like Decartes argued? Or are you persuaded by the arguments of physicalism that we are purely physical beings?
If you agree with Descartes, how would you explain the fact that our mental life seems to be very closely connected to a physical organ, namely the brain. If you agree with physicalism, how do you explain the fact that our mental life seems to be like nothing else in the physical world (think of how unique something like consciousness is, for example).
Write your thoughts on these issues.

the definition of dualism is The division of something conceptually into two opposed or contrasted aspects, or the state of being so divided

and also the definition of physicalism is a philosophical position holding that everything which exists is no more extensive than its physical property; that is, that there are no kinds of things other than physical things.

 

    I agree to the ideas of Descartes that mentality and physical being is divided two different things. Descartes was a catholic that's why It was more convincing for him because as we know in Christian Theology, you can clearly see what's good and what's evil and also light and the darkness, sheeps and goats saints and sinners. It sees the world in a very divided sight.

   However, the reason why I agree to Descartes' dualism is I believe there is something that could resist orders from brain, so-called free will. I know this society is more opened to the thoughts of physicalism and doesn't really adapt dualism just because most of people think that when we need to make a decision or simply when we need to choose something we do not choose something according to our free will because we depend too much on act of our brain and also the word 'free' means 'Not under the control or in the power of another; able to act or be done as one wishes' but when we choose something we always reason and consider various things so we are already under control by those things that you consider in your mind or brain. well, that is very convincing and I do not want to put things this way .... but we all acknowledge the existence of free will from deep inside our hearts. 

   In addition, what physicalists claim is too weak to explain every human being's individual patterns of behavior because there will always be an exception. In other words, we need something other than physical being to explain this and from this fact we can say that mental world which is not hindered by any factors from outside of your mental system exist. 

week 4 pragmatism and feminism

Pragmatism and Feminist Epistemology both challenge the view of knowledge as a detached, intellectual activity. Do you think they are right? How do you think we should think about knowledge? Now that we have concluded the section on epistemology, write about what kind of thing you think knowledge is.     Certainly, both of sides and the way they thought was just different from other philosophers that we studied earlier.     Well, pragmatism flourished from late 19th century to early 20th century and around that time I think I could understand why they had to think of the knowledge that way. They didn't look just as it is, but something else that enables us to do something ...In other words, for pragmatists, knowledge was supposed to make us more practical and active to achieve a certain beliefs. The way they thought and when I think about many provocations back then, I think they were right about using knowledge as a tool to produce useful materials and also succeed according to one's belief.      As a result,  It made enough to face the challenges at that time in many countries as they adapted capitalism.           As I look back what I've learned from the last 4 weeks, this society, we're living in has  adapted ideas from Socrates through Descartes, Empiricism, Kant to pragmatism and last 50 years, until now women have been trying to discover what we are and also what's difference between women and men as members who consist and contribute this society. I think there's no genuine knowledge that ultimately right and true all the time. I think knowledge and great thoughts has been changed through the time and I believe It is still changing and It will keep changing as people and society are changing.             Therefore, In some aspects, I have to agree with Socrates that 'we know nothing' and also with Descartes that 'I think therefore I exist.' cause I know now through the study that without thinking and seeking for the knowledge It won't move forward for sure.