Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!lunwic
From: lunwic@aix03.aix.rpi.edu (Jeffrey G Lunn)
Newsgroups: comp.society.futures
Subject: Thinking Machines
Message-ID: <9^}^-!+@rpi.edu>
Date: 30 Nov 90 04:01:02 GMT
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY
Lines: 21
Nntp-Posting-Host: aix03.aix.rpi.edu


  	This is a subject that I have been thinking a lot about in the last
couple of weeks.  We discussed it in one of my classes and it prompted me to
write a paper about it.  Suppose that one day we are capable of constructing
computers that are able to think - that is, think in the sense that you or I
do.  They would be able to look at any problem, formulate a hypothesis about
how to go about solving that problem, then think through the steps necessary 
to come up with a solution.  If no logical solution is apparent, this computer
would perform an educated guess based intuitively on what it "felt" is the 
correct solution, much like humans do in similar situations.  My question is,
should we let such thinking machines exist?  I feel that people would be too
tempted to let such machines take over previously human thinking tasks such
as figuring out difficult mathematical problems or searching for new elementary
physics particles or even writing poetry.  It is possible that by letting
machines do the cerebral work, the collective human mind would stagnate from
lack of meaningful stimulation.  Then humans would live for nothing but to
survive and to be as comfortable as possible.  I do not consider this a
meaningful way of life.  What do others think?  Can mankind develop such
machines without sacrificing their drive for mental stimulation?  Or would
the situation that I described occur?                                   
                                                - Jeff Lunn