人工智能与正义的网络乌托邦主义。为什么人工智能不是智能?

M. Di Salvo
{"title":"人工智能与正义的网络乌托邦主义。为什么人工智能不是智能?","authors":"M. Di Salvo","doi":"10.21202/2782-2923.2024.1.264-279","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: to show the ontological differences between human and artificial intelligence and address structural divergences at the definitional level.Methods: dialectical approach to cognition of social phenomena, allowing to analyze them in historical development and functioning in the context of the totality of objective and subjective factors, which predetermined the following research methods: formal-logical and sociological.Results: a cross-cutting analysis was applied to the phenomenon of AI between cyber utopianism and cyber realism. Starting from a quote by Max Tegmark, the theory of artificial intelligence is reconstructed by the theorists who founded the discipline (Turing, Minsky, Bernstein, von Neumann) and it is discussed why – in light of the discoveries and assumptions of neuroscience – it is not possible to define it as intelligence according to human criteria. Three short notes are included in the appendix that complete the discussion: 1. on the consciousness of machines 2. on the theory of utopian cyber employment and remuneration 3. “The hungry judge is more cruel” (discussion on an Israeli study).Scientific novelty: through the examination of multiple types of intelligence (Gardner) and social intelligence (Thorndike, Goleman), a more complex definition of intelligence is proposed than that which can be replicated by artificial neural networks, especially in relation to the interaction between animal and environment. Three short messages highlight the uncertainty and risks that may arise from the rampant use of artificial intelligence as judges.Practical significance: starting from a correct definition of human intelligence, the author comes to the definition of artificial intelligence. Beyond the myth of AI, we discover its limits and the objective limitations we must provide for in order to save the most precious asset we have: mankind.","PeriodicalId":507562,"journal":{"name":"Russian Journal of Economics and Law","volume":"34 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Artificial Intelligence and the cyber utopianism of justice. Why AI is not intelligence and man’s struggle to survive himself\",\"authors\":\"M. Di Salvo\",\"doi\":\"10.21202/2782-2923.2024.1.264-279\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objective: to show the ontological differences between human and artificial intelligence and address structural divergences at the definitional level.Methods: dialectical approach to cognition of social phenomena, allowing to analyze them in historical development and functioning in the context of the totality of objective and subjective factors, which predetermined the following research methods: formal-logical and sociological.Results: a cross-cutting analysis was applied to the phenomenon of AI between cyber utopianism and cyber realism. Starting from a quote by Max Tegmark, the theory of artificial intelligence is reconstructed by the theorists who founded the discipline (Turing, Minsky, Bernstein, von Neumann) and it is discussed why – in light of the discoveries and assumptions of neuroscience – it is not possible to define it as intelligence according to human criteria. Three short notes are included in the appendix that complete the discussion: 1. on the consciousness of machines 2. on the theory of utopian cyber employment and remuneration 3. “The hungry judge is more cruel” (discussion on an Israeli study).Scientific novelty: through the examination of multiple types of intelligence (Gardner) and social intelligence (Thorndike, Goleman), a more complex definition of intelligence is proposed than that which can be replicated by artificial neural networks, especially in relation to the interaction between animal and environment. Three short messages highlight the uncertainty and risks that may arise from the rampant use of artificial intelligence as judges.Practical significance: starting from a correct definition of human intelligence, the author comes to the definition of artificial intelligence. Beyond the myth of AI, we discover its limits and the objective limitations we must provide for in order to save the most precious asset we have: mankind.\",\"PeriodicalId\":507562,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Russian Journal of Economics and Law\",\"volume\":\"34 6\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Russian Journal of Economics and Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21202/2782-2923.2024.1.264-279\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Russian Journal of Economics and Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21202/2782-2923.2024.1.264-279","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:说明人类智能与人工智能在本体论上的差异,并解决定义层面的结构性分歧。方法:辩证地认知社会现象,从而在主客观因素的整体背景下分析其历史发展和运作,这就决定了以下研究方法:形式逻辑和社会学。结果:在网络乌托邦主义和网络现实主义之间对人工智能现象进行了横向分析。从马克斯-泰格马克(Max Tegmark)的一句话开始,由人工智能学科的奠基人(图灵、明斯基、伯恩斯坦、冯-诺依曼)重新构建了人工智能理论,并讨论了为什么根据神经科学的发现和假设,不可能按照人类标准将其定义为智能。附录中的三个简短注释使讨论更加完整:1.关于机器的意识 2.关于乌托邦式的网络就业和报酬理论 3.关于 "饥饿的法官更残酷"。"科学新颖性:通过对多种智力类型(加德纳)和社会智力(桑代克、戈尔曼)的研究,提出了比人工神经网络所能复制的智力定义更为复杂的智力定义,尤其是在动物与环境的互动方面。三条简短的信息强调了人工智能作为评判标准的滥用可能带来的不确定性和风险。实践意义:从人类智能的正确定义出发,作者得出了人工智能的定义。在人工智能的神话之外,我们发现了它的局限性,以及为了拯救我们最宝贵的财富--人类,我们必须规定的客观局限性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Artificial Intelligence and the cyber utopianism of justice. Why AI is not intelligence and man’s struggle to survive himself
Objective: to show the ontological differences between human and artificial intelligence and address structural divergences at the definitional level.Methods: dialectical approach to cognition of social phenomena, allowing to analyze them in historical development and functioning in the context of the totality of objective and subjective factors, which predetermined the following research methods: formal-logical and sociological.Results: a cross-cutting analysis was applied to the phenomenon of AI between cyber utopianism and cyber realism. Starting from a quote by Max Tegmark, the theory of artificial intelligence is reconstructed by the theorists who founded the discipline (Turing, Minsky, Bernstein, von Neumann) and it is discussed why – in light of the discoveries and assumptions of neuroscience – it is not possible to define it as intelligence according to human criteria. Three short notes are included in the appendix that complete the discussion: 1. on the consciousness of machines 2. on the theory of utopian cyber employment and remuneration 3. “The hungry judge is more cruel” (discussion on an Israeli study).Scientific novelty: through the examination of multiple types of intelligence (Gardner) and social intelligence (Thorndike, Goleman), a more complex definition of intelligence is proposed than that which can be replicated by artificial neural networks, especially in relation to the interaction between animal and environment. Three short messages highlight the uncertainty and risks that may arise from the rampant use of artificial intelligence as judges.Practical significance: starting from a correct definition of human intelligence, the author comes to the definition of artificial intelligence. Beyond the myth of AI, we discover its limits and the objective limitations we must provide for in order to save the most precious asset we have: mankind.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信