Seems
like Descartes knew there were two systems at work inside a human:
1. the human mind,
2. the human brain.
Looks like I can
finally create a PowerPoint slide to better illustrate how Mind-Vision AI will
process beliefs/stimuli).
“I think, therefore I am” is a phrase
by 17th century French philosopher René Descartes. It appears in his 1637 book
Discourse on the Method. In his most famous work, Meditations on First
Philosophy, he changes the wording to “I am, I exist”.
What does Descartes mean by I am I
exist? A statement by the seventeenth-century French philosopher René
Descartes. “I think; therefore, I am” was the end of the search Descartes
conducted for a statement that could not be doubted. He found that he could not
doubt that he himself existed, as he was the one doing the doubting in the
first place.
Software engineering and Computer
Science might be more aligned with Descartes than any other philosopher.
However, Descartes was possibly very mathematical in his thinking, yet
expressed his mathematical thoughts in a non-mathematical way. Possibly so that
others would more easily understand his complex ideas.
Descartes is more than likely, the
first person to consider if he was an artificial intelligence entity or an
actual human. More than likely, he is the unofficial creator of artificial
intelligence.
For the Mind-Vision AI, I am not well
versed in Descartes' philosophy. I arrived at his philosophy using software
engineering principles. Software must always eliminate the chance for doubt
when it performs.
In his writings, Descartes' goal is to
suspend judgment about any belief that is even slightly doubtful. Descartes
ponders various scenarios, including his own about his relationship to the
world, and doubts them to prove they are indeed his own beliefs.
Descartes may have ultimately been trying to separate his mind from the brain. This is an impossible feat to accomplish without sophisticated out-of-this-world science.
Using Descartes' beliefs as an analogy, Descartes lays the foundation for Software Engineering and Computer Science to exist because software, only exists inside of hardware. Software exists without doubt inside of hardware. This is very similar to the human mind. The human mind exists without doubt inside of the human.
For software, if there is doubt in a software
system, the system does not work as software should work. Thus, using Computer
Science and software engineering, Descartes' philosophy can be deconstructed to
see what else can be learned from his intellectual insights.
I think every AI system or AI entity must operate like Descartes' mental state when he questioned his own existence, to determine if he was an artificial intelligence entity or a human. Had Descartes not questioned his own existence, we would not have certain intellectual tools at our disposal.
Western civilization would possibly not have the method of reverse-engineering of systems without Descartes questioning his own existence. Doubt is built into the reverse-engineering process in an implicit way.
The Computer Science concept called Inheritance can also be viewed using Descartes' Lens of Doubt. The software engineering development life cycle model called the Waterfall Methodology (Waterfall Model), is also a form of Descartes' Lens of Doubt applied to software engineering. I will save this analysis for another time, maybe when it is time to complete the PhD in Computer Science.
When this happens, I think I will have to prove that Descartes is the "father" of Artificial Intelligence or Computer Science or both. I am still not too sure on this.
Descartes, for his time, was ahead of almost all of humanity because he had the fortune of being able to question his own existence, to make sure he was not an artificial intelligence entity. Moreover, Descartes paved the way for the method of system deconstruction known as "reverse-engineering".
Admittedly, we as a civilization, do not know what prompted Descartes to write his meditations that led him to coin the phrase, "I think; therefore, I am. We just know that he created them, and that we accept them to be sound in principle.
Comments
Post a Comment