Can Robots think and feel?

 

 

 

Can Robots think and feel? Use theoretical resources from the module to demonstrate how you have thought through this question

 

 

Sample Solution

This is an oft-debated topic that has been discussed in philosophical, ethical and psychological contexts for decades. While there are many different opinions surrounding this issue, the question of whether robots can think and feel can be explored through the works of various theorists from across the module .

The concept of artificial intelligence has been widely studied by philosophers such as Searle (1980), who proposed what is known as “the Chinese Room Argument”. This argument claims that even though a computer may appear to understand language , it cannot truly understand what it is saying because it lacks consciousness and emotional capabilities which are essential for true understanding (Searle 1980). This suggests that while robots may be able to process information they lack the capacity for higher level cognitive functions or feelings.

Psychoanalyst Erik Erikson also provides insight into how machines might never be able to experience emotions like humans do due to their inability to form meaningful connections with others (Erikson 2009). He argued that although a machine could act out behaviors associated with particular emotions , its actions would remain inadequate unless driven by real emotion derived from interpersonal relationships . Thus suggesting that without genuine human interaction robots will never be capable of experiencing true emotion .

Finally, philosopher Hannah Arendt discussed how human reasoning differs from robotic programming in her work The Human Condition (Arendt 1958). She asserted that whereas animals act mainly out of necessity or desire robots on the other hand have no way of comprehending why certain decisions must be made, instead relying on preprogrammed instructions which limit their ability for higher level thought processes.

regards to the osmosis of pieces into lumps. Mill operator recognizes pieces and lumps of data, the differentiation being that a piece is comprised of various pieces of data. It is fascinating to take note of that while there is a limited ability to recall lumps of data, how much pieces in every one of those lumps can change broadly (Miller, 1956). Anyway it’s anything but a straightforward instance of having the memorable option huge pieces right away, somewhat that as each piece turns out to be more natural, it very well may be acclimatized into a lump, which is then recollected itself. Recoding is the interaction by which individual pieces are ‘recoded’ and allocated to lumps. Consequently the ends that can be drawn from Miller’s unique work is that, while there is an acknowledged breaking point to the quantity of pieces of data that can be put away in prompt (present moment) memory, how much data inside every one of those lumps can be very high, without unfavorably influencing the review of similar number

This question has been answered.

Get Answer
WeCreativez WhatsApp Support
Our customer support team is here to answer your questions. Ask us anything!
👋 Hi, Welcome to Compliant Papers.