奥古斯丁,人工智能和语言的两种模式

IF 0.3 3区 哲学 0 RELIGION
Kevin Jung
{"title":"奥古斯丁,人工智能和语言的两种模式","authors":"Kevin Jung","doi":"10.1111/jore.70004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This article explores the two models of language articulated by Ludwig Wittgenstein and Augustine. It examines first, the central roles of language in humans and intelligent machines, and second, the implications of these models for understanding what it means to be human, as well as the promises and limits of AI systems. The strength of the Wittgensteinian model is particularly evident in how AI systems emulate certain types of inferential reasoning in humans by identifying the semantic roles of words in language games. By contrast, the strength of the Augustinian model is most apparent in highlighting the limits of AI systems, particularly their struggle to simulate human intelligence beyond computational reasoning, which is largely trained on big data and relies on rule-based inference to generate solutions. The Augustinian model, in particular, discloses the complexities of human cognition that extend beyond linguistic abilities, emphasizing the role of higher-order volition and understanding in communication.</p>","PeriodicalId":45722,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF RELIGIOUS ETHICS","volume":"53 2","pages":"217-238"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jore.70004","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Augustine, AI, and the Two Models of Language\",\"authors\":\"Kevin Jung\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jore.70004\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>This article explores the two models of language articulated by Ludwig Wittgenstein and Augustine. It examines first, the central roles of language in humans and intelligent machines, and second, the implications of these models for understanding what it means to be human, as well as the promises and limits of AI systems. The strength of the Wittgensteinian model is particularly evident in how AI systems emulate certain types of inferential reasoning in humans by identifying the semantic roles of words in language games. By contrast, the strength of the Augustinian model is most apparent in highlighting the limits of AI systems, particularly their struggle to simulate human intelligence beyond computational reasoning, which is largely trained on big data and relies on rule-based inference to generate solutions. The Augustinian model, in particular, discloses the complexities of human cognition that extend beyond linguistic abilities, emphasizing the role of higher-order volition and understanding in communication.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45722,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JOURNAL OF RELIGIOUS ETHICS\",\"volume\":\"53 2\",\"pages\":\"217-238\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jore.70004\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JOURNAL OF RELIGIOUS ETHICS\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jore.70004\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"RELIGION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JOURNAL OF RELIGIOUS ETHICS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jore.70004","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文探讨了维特根斯坦和奥古斯丁提出的两种语言模式。它首先考察了语言在人类和智能机器中的核心作用,其次,这些模型对理解人类意味着什么以及人工智能系统的承诺和限制的影响。维特根斯坦模型的优势在人工智能系统如何通过识别语言游戏中单词的语义角色来模拟人类的某些类型的推理推理方面表现得尤为明显。相比之下,奥古斯丁模型的优势在强调人工智能系统的局限性方面最为明显,尤其是它们在模拟计算推理之外的人类智能方面的困难,计算推理主要是在大数据上训练的,并依赖于基于规则的推理来生成解决方案。特别是奥古斯丁模型揭示了人类认知的复杂性,超越了语言能力,强调了高阶意志和理解在交流中的作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Augustine, AI, and the Two Models of Language

This article explores the two models of language articulated by Ludwig Wittgenstein and Augustine. It examines first, the central roles of language in humans and intelligent machines, and second, the implications of these models for understanding what it means to be human, as well as the promises and limits of AI systems. The strength of the Wittgensteinian model is particularly evident in how AI systems emulate certain types of inferential reasoning in humans by identifying the semantic roles of words in language games. By contrast, the strength of the Augustinian model is most apparent in highlighting the limits of AI systems, particularly their struggle to simulate human intelligence beyond computational reasoning, which is largely trained on big data and relies on rule-based inference to generate solutions. The Augustinian model, in particular, discloses the complexities of human cognition that extend beyond linguistic abilities, emphasizing the role of higher-order volition and understanding in communication.

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
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
25.00%
发文量
33
期刊介绍: Founded in 1973, the Journal of Religious Ethics is committed to publishing the very best scholarship in religious ethics, to fostering new work in neglected areas, and to stimulating exchange on significant issues. Emphasizing comparative religious ethics, foundational conceptual and methodological issues in religious ethics, and historical studies of influential figures and texts, each issue contains independent essays, commissioned articles, and a book review essay, as well as a Letters, Notes, and Comments section. Published primarily for scholars working in ethics, religious studies, history of religions, and theology, the journal is also of interest to scholars working in related fields such as philosophy, history, social and political theory, and literary studies.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信