CS009: Computers and Human Values
Department of Computer Science, Brown University
Notes, September 14th --
Roger B. Blumberg
Hans Moravec's ROBOT: Session I
Introduction: Animals, Humans and Machines
For about two thousand years, an important question in
natural philosophy was what distinguished humans from
(other) animals. It is perhaps a sign that we've moved on
to other problems that a large number of people consider
the traditional distinctions chauvinistic.
In the middle
and late 19th century, industrial technology seemed
to possess the power to transform the life of human
societies as well as humanity's self-images. This power
inspired anxiety and thus were born philosophical
concerns about the relationship between "man and machine".
In 1844, Karl Marx wrote:
"The machine accommodates itself to man's weakness, in
order to turn weak man into a machine." (from Marx'
Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts,
3rd
Manuscript (1844) [Italics his].
- What do you think Marx means by "weakness" here?
- Do you agree with the spirit of the remark?
- How well do you think this formulation applies to post-industrial
technologies (e.g. personal computers)?
Even 50 years ago we might have been most concerned about the
sorts of ominous visions of technology and contemporary life
that characterize Charlie Chaplin's Modern Times. At
first glance, such visions may seem out-of-date in the face
of computer technologies and the post-industrial workplace --
compare the elements of Modern Times and The
Matrix that are designed to provoke anxiety (and we should
talk about Nina's WebCT posting here -- and
indeed we're tempted to believe that computer technology has
solved
many of the problems inherent in industrial
technologies. In any case, the contrast between the organization of
industrial and "information" work is our society remains striking.
So, some themes for the day/week:
- How do we distinguish animals, humans and machines?
- What is the relationship between technology and freedom?
Reading Moravec's ROBOT
"Preface" and "Escape Velocity"
In the Prologue to his 1988 book, Mind Children
Moravec had written:
"Our biological genes, and the flesh and blood bodies they build, will
play a rapidly diminishing role in the new regime. But will our minds,
where culture originated, also be lost in the coup? Perhaps not. The
coming revolution may liberate human minds as effectively as it
liberates human culture." (p. 4)
- Having read the first few chapters of Robot, how
would you explain what Moravec has in mind (!?!) here?
- How many metaphors do you spot in this passage and is it
worth paying attention to them (i.e. how do metaphors work)?
- This passage was part of an argument that Moravec made in 1988
about the future of "intelligence". How would you describe the
argument of "Escape Velocity" (i.e. can you identify both premises
and conclusions in the chapter) and how does M. use images along
with text to make the argument?
- On page 3 Moravec relates the story of Davi Kopenawa. What is
the moral of the story as he relates it? Could the same "facts"
be used to argue a different point?
- On page 4 Moravec alludes to Richard Dawkins' The
Selfish Gene, which is exactly the sort of scientific
treatise I mentioned last week. If you've read Dawkins, what
is the point of the "selfish gene" metaphor? Does Moravec
offer an explanation of the human?
- How does the "Back to the Future" section (p. 9) illustrate
what can be meant by the phrase "politics of technology"?
- On page 12, Moravec sets up an analogy to explain what he
calls "Mind". What is the analogy and is the analogy a reasonable
argument for Moravec's conception?
- At the end of "Escape Velocity" Moravec the "wild intelligences ...
to whom the future belongs" and he suggests that our powers of
imagination are not "adequate" to see into this future. Does
this make any sense to you?
"Caution! Robot Vehicle!"
- What is the connection between this chapter and the previous
(and next) one in the context of your sense of Moravec's argument?
- In the section "Artificial Intellects," Moravec mentions
Turing, and we discussed briefly the famous "Turing test"
last week. Why should electronic computers have suggested
that "thinking machines" were possible in a way that industrial
machinery did not? Why are claims about "artificial intelligence"
controversial, and why does
chess play such an important
role in debates and research concerning AI?
- In this chapter we encounter some technical language.
Is it necessary to the point(s) made by Moravec? Were you more
thrown by the numbers and units of measurement (e.g.
MIPS) here than in "Escape Velocity"? What's nice about technical
vocabularies?
- Do you agree with Moravec's picture of the relationship
between computing power and "intelligence"?
Computers, Animals and Humans
From the very beginning of Moravec's book, he mentions non-human
forms of life. What have animals to do with Moravec's claims/arguments/theses?
What is your own
view about using terms like "learns", "knows", "believes", and
"understands" to describe animals like snails, rabbits and cats?
How does this view of yours compare to your attitude about
ascribing such capacities to robots?
Let's turn to "Power and Presence".
For Next Time:: We will not meet on Thursday, the 16th, and will
make up the class at some time in the future. For Tuesday the 21st,
finish Moravec's ROBOT, but before that consider a
response to the "Robopet" exercise Tom
Dean and I wrote some years ago. We'll use the WebCT account to post
a first round of responses by Friday. We'll have our final discussion
of Moravec on Thursday the 23rd.
Back to the
Syllabus