My argument to support the provocative title of this discussion is: AI is indeed intelligent in that it is able to find patterns in huge amounts of data but there is no way AI could reach to judgements like we humans can.
AI is indeed intelligent in that it is able to find patterns in huge amounts of data but there is no way AI could reach to judgements like we humans can — Pez
But to leave decisions regarding therapy entirely to AI or replace judges and jurors by AI would be fatal. — Pez
If we define “stupidity” not as lack of intelligence but lack of judgement, one might justly say that Artificial Intelligence is intelligent but still stupid in its own way. I am referring here to the Kantian concept of “Urteilskraft”. According to this philosopher intellect (Verstand) is the power to create rules whereas judgement is quite a different faculty, enabling us to decide, whether a specific rule applies to a single instance.
Rules are always common to many different cases. To find out, if a singular case applies to a rule, judgement is necessary. There is no way to find this out by exerting another rule, as this results in an infinite regress. So my argument to support the provocative title of this discussion is: AI is indeed intelligent in that it is able to find patterns in huge amounts of data but there is no way AI could reach to judgements like we humans can.
Such discussion might sound academic, but it has impacts on the proper use and possible dangers associated with this technology. AI is still in the state of infancy right now, but it is nevertheless amazing what it is able to do. No doubt, it can be of invaluable help in finding medical diagnosis or related precedences in jurisdiction. But to leave decisions regarding therapy entirely to AI or replace judges and jurors by AI would be fatal.
The road to our house is quite steep, winding and narrow, but once in a while big trucks get stuck there because the drivers relied entirely on their navigation system instead of applying common sense as well. To put our faith solely on AI might get us into the same situation unless we properly exert judgement and check, if the outcome is plausible at all. — Pez
...human participants and ChatGPT were given descriptions of different scenarios and asked to write short, compassionate answers. When other participants rated the various responses, they scored the AI responses as highest for empathy.
Concerns over the danger of machines that can “read” us but don’t care about us are more than theoretical. In March 2023, a Belgian man reportedly died by suicide after six weeks of discussions with an AI chatbot. Media outlets reported that he had been sharing his fears about the climate crisis. The chatbot seemed to feed his worries and to express its own emotions – including encouraging him to kill himself so that they would “live together in paradise”. Pretending at empathy to too great a degree without the common-sense guard rails that a human is likely to offer can, it appears, be lethal.
AI is indeed intelligent in that it is able to find patterns in huge amounts of data but there is no way AI could reach to judgements like we humans can. — Pez
Leaving it to humans is fatal too. — Lionino
AI couldn't reach higher stated of mind. Or psychedelic state of mind — Abhiram
Rules are always common to many different cases. To find out, if a singular case applies to a rule, judgement is necessary. There is no way to find this out by exerting another rule, as this results in an infinite regress. So my argument to support the provocative title of this discussion is: AI is indeed intelligent in that it is able to find patterns in huge amounts of data but there is no way AI could reach to judgements like we humans can. — Pez
It is a bit cheap to proclaim that AI will never be able to achieve something or other because it hasn't done so yet — SophistiCat
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.