La inteligencia artificial como cuestión empírica: un comentario de "Computing machinery and intelligence"
Loading...
Download
Official URL
Full text at PDC
Publication date
2024
Authors
Advisors (or tutors)
Editors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Universidad Complutense de Madrid
Citation
Valor Yébenes, J. A. (2024): «La inteligencia artificial como cuestión empírica: un comentario de “Computing machinery and intelligence”», Revista de Filosofía, Avance en línea, pp. 1-16. Disponible en: https://dx.doi.org/10.5209/resf.96771.
Abstract
En “Computing Machinery and Intelligence”, de 1950, Turing acaba afirmando la posibilidad de procedimientos automáticos computacionales que sustituyan al pensamiento humano. Son reconocidas las críticas de Searle a este artículo, que se han retomado y ampliado a propósito de la actual discusión sobre el alcance y los límites de la inteligencia artificial. Especialmente relevantes al respecto resultan los últimos trabajos de Žižek y Larson, así como la defensa de las propuestas de Turing que ha realizado Daniel Dennett, especialmente en su obra final.
De toda esta discusión quiero valerme para esclarecer cuál es exactamente la posición de Turing a partir de 1950. La conclusión a la que llego es que Turing no defiende que los procedimientos automáticos computacionales, tal y como él mismo los define, sustituyen al pensamiento humano, sino que es posible que lo puedan sustituir, y que se trata de una cuestión que solo se puede resolver empíricamente.
In “Computing Machinery and Intelligence”, from 1950, Turing ends up affirming the possibility of automatic computational procedures that replace human thought. Searle's criticisms of this article are recognized, and they have been revisited and expanded in the context of the current discussion on the scope and limits of artificial intelligence. Particularly relevant in this regard are the latest works by Žižek and Larson, as well as Daniel Dennett’s defense of Turing’s proposals, especially in his final work. I want to draw on this entire discussion to clarify exactly what Turing’s position is after 1950. The conclusion I reach is that Turing does not defend the idea that automatic computational procedures, as he himself defines them, replace human thought, but that it is possible that they can replace it, and that it is a question that can only be resolved empirically.
In “Computing Machinery and Intelligence”, from 1950, Turing ends up affirming the possibility of automatic computational procedures that replace human thought. Searle's criticisms of this article are recognized, and they have been revisited and expanded in the context of the current discussion on the scope and limits of artificial intelligence. Particularly relevant in this regard are the latest works by Žižek and Larson, as well as Daniel Dennett’s defense of Turing’s proposals, especially in his final work. I want to draw on this entire discussion to clarify exactly what Turing’s position is after 1950. The conclusion I reach is that Turing does not defend the idea that automatic computational procedures, as he himself defines them, replace human thought, but that it is possible that they can replace it, and that it is a question that can only be resolved empirically.
Description
Este trabajo se enmarca dentro del grupo de investigación UCM 930174.