Philosophy of artificial intelligence

Philosophy of artificial intelligence State and explain Lucass argument against the possibility of AI. what do you think is the best reply to Lucas argument? GÃ ¶del suggested that the mind was a computerised mechanism. He suggested that the mind was merely a formulation of logic that was associated with a system and structure of language as representative of the world. This implied that intelligence was a learning process that was based upon accepting and rejecting hypothesis about the world through a set of formula that was deemed either provable or un-provable within the system of logic (GÃ ¶del, 1934). This idea was backed up by cognitive research based upon the human capacity and nature of learning. Bruner et al, devised a test to see how it was the human mind constructed categories of logic, believing it to be by way of GÃ ¶del’s hypothesis acceptance and rejection (Bruner et al, 1956). He used a variety of shapes in a variety of conditions some sharing the same number of shapes, some sharing the same colour of shapes and some sharing the same number of borders surrounding the shapes. From the results of his experiment, B runer claimed that ther were two forms of learning that were apparent. These were regarded as successive scanning, which entertained one hypothesis at a time and conservative scanning, which sought to eliminate classes of hypotheses such as border, number of shapes and colour similarity and dissimilarity (Bruner et al, 1956). This growing belief in the mind as a mathematic translator of the meaning of experience provided the foundation for Turing who surmised that artificial intelligence was a form of intelligence that could learn according to the coded principles of mathematic equations and could be understood as mimicry of human behaviour. He subsequently suggested that responses through a rejection and acceptance of truths that accords to the conceptual framework were all that the human mind consisted of. This idea of the mind as a programmed agent, rejecting the truths of logical and mathematic equations was fundamental to GÃ ¶del. To GÃ ¶del, the structural reality that an in telligent being saw before i implied that Artificial intelligence could be created in accordance to that structure and that human life, or perhaps experiential living, was merely a reaction to certain stimuli based upon a structural code of predetermined logic just as it is with a computer simulation. Unhappy at this model of the cognitive mind or with the notion of intelligence as being founded upon formula and theorem, J.R. Lucas, argued that GÃ ¶dels theorem posed many problems in his view that the mind was like a computer. Speaking of the limitations that the quantitative artificial brain may encounter in terms of acceptance and un-acceptance of certain truths according to its programming, Lucas suggested that ‘All that GÃ ¶del has proved is that a mind cannot produce a formal proof of the consistency of a formal system inside the system itself: but there is no objection to going outside the system and no objection to producing informal arguments for the consistency either of a formal system or of something less formal and less systematized. Such informal arguments will not be able to be completely formalized: but then the whole tenor of GÃ ¶dels results is that we ought not to ask, and cannot obtain, complete formalization.’ (Lucas, 1961) Rationale was provided for Lucas’s approach with the development of the Chinese room experiment by Searle. Searle indicated that even though an artificial intelligence could recognise, incorporate and subsequently mimic the external behaviours required to appear human (or emotionally intelligent) that this did not necessarily indicate any evidence of an awareness of what this behaviour meant or symbolised to other humans in essence, it did not understand the true human meaning. He used the example of an English speaking human going inside the mechanical mind of a robot and using certain symbols as a coded ’representative’ for the instruction of an unknown language i.e. Chinese (Searle, 1980). He then indicated that although the human had a form of code to illicit a response to the language of Chinese he did not actually know what the meaning or significance of what he was doing related to. Essentially, it was simply a response according toa pre programmed code. Following this criticisms of artificial intelligence as a mechanical process involving a pre programmed innate knowledge of the environment and of human behaviour which had led to Searle‘s Chinese room experiment, Lucas reasoned that, ‘Complexity often does introduce qualitative differences. Although it sounds implausible, it might turn out that above a certain level of complexity, a machine ceased to be predictable, even in principle, and started doing things on its own account, or, to use a very revealing phrase, it might begin to have a mind of its own. It might begin to have a mind of its own. It would begin to have a mind of its own when it was no longer entirely predictable and entirely docile, but was capable of doing things which we recognized as intelligent, and not just mistakes or random shots, but which we had not programmed into it.’ (Lucas, 1961) This seems to define what is human and what is machine. For Lucas, he does not dispute the theoretical idea that artificial intelligence can become as like humans. However, he does make the distinction between a mechanical automaton and an autonomous mind that thinks free of systematic code that perceives experience through an acceptance of logical truths and rejection of unfounded abstraction. Bringing into context the notion of the human mind as being a determinant for the structure of knowledge rather than a logical interpreter of that knowledge, Lucas reasoned that if, unlike Turing had suggested, a mechanical mind could begin to think free of it‘s programmed code then, ‘It would cease to be a machine, within the meaning of the act. What is at stake in the mechanist debate is not how minds are, or might be, brought into being, but how they operate. It is essential for the mechanist thesis that the mechanical model of the mind shall operate according to mechanical principles, that is, that we can understand the operation of the whole in terms of the operations of its parts, and the operation of each part either shall be determined by its initial state and the construction of the machine, or shall be a random choice between a determinate number of determinate operations’ (Lucas, 1961) However, although his argument backed up by Searle’s Chinese room experiment gave reasonable rationale for a rejection of a mechanical intelligence based upon the ability of the subject to see outside of a logical structure, which was not necessarily pre determined or pre programmed, it did accord to the sentimental notion of liberal humanity. In reaction to this notion French philosopher Jean Baudrillard noted some crucial factors in the reality of humanities cultural condition that could be seen as contradicting this liberal freedom that Lucas prescribed. Suggesting that the current moral reality that figured as so crucial to Lucas’ rationale, was being replaced by ‘a hedonistic morality of pure satisfaction, like a new state of nature at the heart of hyper civilisation’ Baudrillard prescribed the notion of the hyper real as being a simulation that was beyond that of a logical code that applied to a structure of knowledge and instead deterred from idelogi cal frameworks that informed a notion of liberal humanity (Baudrillard, 1968, p.3). He suggested that, ‘A whole imagery based on contact, a sensory mimicry and a tactile mysticism, basically ecology in its entirety, comes to be grafted on to this universe of operational simulation, multi-stimulation and multi response. This incessant test of successful adaptation is naturalised by assimilating it to animal mimicry. , and even to the Indians with their innate sense of ecology tropisms, mimicry, and empathy: the ecological evangelism of open systems, with positive or negative feedback, will be engulfed in this breach, with an ideology of regulation with information that is only an avatar, in accordance of a more flexible patter.’ (Baudrillard, 1976, p.9) However, what Baudrillard does is implement the idea of a simulated code that works by replacing the notion of humanistic ideology that once informed the gap sophisticated and complex gap between the subject and the environment, such as social exchange and communal ideas. By doing this Baudrillard then shows gave example of how this simulated code informed a new humanity and shaped intelligence to be un-conformist to a life according to the meaning supported by the notion of humanity, but instead created an imaginary life that was understood and identified with by its relationship to the values apparent within an external code being communed essentially, placing life itself as a simulated relationship of the subject and his / her own choice of object. This meant that essentially the human emphasis on the mysteries of the human mind emphasised by Lucas were just as questionable and as determinist as the artificial intelligence that GÃ ¶del prescribed. This can be seen as the fundame ntaly crucial contemporary reply to Lucas’ argument for artificial intelligence. Bibliography Baudrillard, J., (1976) Symbolic Exchange and Death Taken from: The Order of Simulacra (1993) London: Sage. Bruner, J, S., Goodnow, J, J., and Austin, G, A., (1956) A Study of Thinking New York: John Wiley and Sons. GÃ ¶del (1934) Original Proof Applies Taken from his Lectures at the Institute of Advanced Study, New Jersey: Princeton. Lucas, J, R., (1961) Minds, Machines, and Godel Philosophy, 36, 112-127. Searle, J, R,. (1980) Minds, brains, and programs. Behavioural and Brain Sciences, 3, (3), 417-457. Turing, A, M., (1950) Computing Machinery and Intelligence, Mind, pp. 433-60, reprinted in The World of Mathematics, edited by James R. Newmann, pp. 2099-2123.

Cola Wars †the Carbonated Soft Drink Industry Porter Five Analysis Essay

The existing players in the soft drink industry have much advantage relative to new entrants. First, supply-side economy discourages new entrants by forcing them to enter the market in large scale. CSD’s demand side benefits of scale also makes it difficult for new entrants to be accepted by the public. In 2002, a survey found that 37% of respondents chose a CSD because it is their favorite brand, while only 10% said so about bottled water. This demonstrates CSD customers’ high brand loyalty and their lack of desire to buy from new entrants. In terms of capital requirement, concentrate manufacturers only requires $25~$50 million to set up a plant that can serve the entire United States of America. Yet, new entrants may have difficulties competing with major players’ well-established brands and their large scale unrecoverable (therefore, hard to finance) spending on advertising. There is also unequal access to bottlers and retail channels for newcomers. Most bottlers are in long-term contracts with major CSD brands; also, the largest distribution channel, supermarkets, consider CSD a â€Å"big traffic draw†, thus provide little to no shelf space for newcomers. In addition, strong fear of retaliation from major players also makes newcomers hesitate to enter. Bargaining Power of Suppliers Required inputs for CSD are mostly raw materials such as caramel coloring, phosphoric or citric acid, natural flavors, caffeine, and fructose. Almost all suppliers of the CSD industry provide undifferentiated commodities and thus have little bargaining power and almost no strength to integrate forward. Bargaining Power of Buyers End consumers and retail channels can both be considered as buyers in the CSD industry. End consumers are likely to have brand loyalty to their CSD as analyzed in threat of new entry. Thus, consumers are expected to continue purchasing a brand unless there is a significant price increase or substantial change in flavor. Consequently, end consumers have little bargaining power. Retail channels, on the other hand, have more bargaining leverage since they buy CSDs in much larger quantities than end consumers. Yet, for retail channels such as supermarkets (making up almost one third of all retail volume), CSDs are considered a â€Å"big traffic draw†, thus reducing its bargaining power. In addition, fountain outlets (making up another 23. 4% of retail channel) also have insignificant bargaining power since they rely on CSD companies’ heavy investment in dispensers, cups, point-of-sale advertising, and many other types of equipment. Threat of Substitutes CSDs are unique in terms of taste and properties. When a consumer craves CSD, it is difficult to find a replacement that can equally satisfy his or her desire. Even after CSD was identified as the â€Å"largest source of obesity-causing sugars in the American diet† in 2005, CSDs still â€Å"accounted for 73. 1% of U. S. non-alcoholic refreshment beverage volume (down from 80. 8% in 2000)† at around the same time. It is true that consumers are moving towards alternatives that have more natural flavors such as several tea-based drinks and bottled water; yet, CSD firms have quickly adapted to this shift and largely dominated the market of these alternatives. Rivalry Among Existing Competitors Even though rivalry among existing competitors – Coke, Pepsi, and Cadbury Schweppes seem intense, the profitability has not been weakened. This is largely because of the high concentration of competition and their focus on promotion, advertising, and other forms of branding instead of waging large-scale price wars. In a way, the success of Coke and Pepsi required the heavy competition on these dimensions. â€Å"Without Coke, Pepsi would have a tough time being an original and lively competitor. The more successful they (Coke) are, the sharper we (Pepsi) have to be. † says Roger Enrico, former CEO of Pepsi. The CSD industry profitability lies within the Cola War itself that forces major players to improve continuously. Through Porter’s five forces analysis, it becomes clear that CSD is so profitable because of the way its industry competition is shaped: high entry barriers due to newcomers’ unfavorable supply-side economies of scale, demand-side benefits of scale, and unrecoverable advertising spending; low bargaining power of suppliers and buyers since CSD requires mainly homogeneous commodities, buyers have high brand loyalty, and retailers rely heavily on CSD firms’ investments; well handled threat of substitutes; and healthy internal rivalry that is vital to continuous improvement.

Contract of Documents between Macbeth and Noddy Bank

The contract for sale which Macbeth had entered with Weetocrunch Ltd is a separate contract with that of the contract entered with the banks with regards to the documentary credits. For the purposes of this question, we are only dealing with the contract of the documents between Macbeth and the confirming bank, Noddy Bank. Noddy bank had been authorized in this case by the issuing bank, Toytown Bank to pay the beneficiary, also known as the seller, Macbeth for the goods he had shipped to Weetocrunch.It is only upon presentation by Macbeth of valid documents that complies with the terms and requirements stated in the Letter of credit that had been opened by Toytown Bank on behalf of Weetocrunch, that he can receive his payment. As it is the letter of credit acts as some form of safeguard for seller that he will receive his payment as once the bank opens the letter of credit, they are under a contractual obligation to pay the seller upon presentation of complying documents.In this case , it can be seen that the documents presented by Macbeth had been ejected twice by the bank, first on the grounds that the documents are not original and secondly where the description of the goods in the bill of lading differs. For that we refer to the body known as Uniform Customs and Practice for Documentary Credits (UCP) which governs the practice of documentary credit. It should be noted that the law construed by UCP must be incorporated into the contract by the parties for it to have legal effect.However, even if it is not incorporated, the courts are likely to view it as impliedly incorporated as it has gained igh level of acceptance among international bankers. Therefore, assuming that IJCP applies in this case, the documents involved are bound by the UCP articles. Under UCP 600, article 15, the bank that is presented with documents have to ensure that they comply with the terms of the credit and if the document complies, they have to pay and under IJCP 500 article 13(a), th e bank is to examine the documents with reasonable care to ascertain whether they appear on the face to be in compliance with the requirement of the credit.If the documents are however not in ompliance, the bank under UCP 600 article 14(b) reserves the right to reject them. It is therefore establish here that the bank do have a right to reject documents. In this case then, the two issues to be dealt with are (1) whether the bank had the right to reject the photocopied custom certificate and (2)whether the bank had the right to reject the bill of lading because of the description error.Issue 1: UCP 600, Article 17(b) states that there should at least be one original of each stipulated document be tendered to the bank and it shall be treated as original it it ore an original signature, mark, stamp or label of the issuer of the document unless the document indicates it is not original and under 17(c), a bank shall also accept a document as original if it appears so be written, typed or stamped by the document issuer's hand, or by the document issuer's original stationary or states that it is original.In this case, it is not stated whether the document had any kind of markings of whether it was indicated as original on it, it was merely stated that it was a photocopied version that was rejected. Assuming that there were no markings as uch, then It could be inferred that the rejection was Justified following the case of Glencore International AG v Bank of China where the documents were rejected because the photocopies were not marked as original.In that case, it was also stated that a signature on photocopied piece does not make it an original but merely an authenticated copy. However, following the case of Credit Industriel et Commercial v China Merchants Bank, it was held that for obvious original documents, they need not be marked and for photocopied documents where there is a stamp of the upplier's name, address and telephone no. with an ink signature, the cour t accepted it as original even though it was not stamped ‘original'.Therefore if there were such markings found on the photocopied custom certificate and the bank had rejected it, the bank may be liable for wrongly rejecting the documents. Issue 2: As mentioned earlier, the bank have to put up with strict compliance when handling documents presented by the beneficiaries. They have to ensure that the documents meets the necessary terms and conditions stated in the letter of credit and as once emarked by Viscount Sumner in Equitable Trust Co of New York v Dawson Partners Ltd, there is no room for documents which are almost the same, or which will do Just as well. In Seaconsar Far East Ltd v Bank Markazi Jomhouri Islami Iran, the letter of credit stipulated that all the documents presented must bear LC number and the buyer's name. When one of the document failed to have the LC no. on it, the bank rejected it and the court found that its action was Justified. Similarly, in JH Rayn er & Co Ltd, Hambro's Bank Ltd, the credit stipulated â€Å"Coromandel Groundnuts† but the eller presented a bill of lading that states â€Å"Machine-shelled groundnuts. Though it had been known for these terms to be used interchangeable, the court found that the bank had the right to reject the documents. By following this case itself, we might be able to infer that the bank was right in rejecting the documents when the bill of lading states ‘Eastern Wheat' instead of ‘Ruritanian wheat'and that fact that it is well known in the wheat trade that the wheat are identical will not matter.However, Macbeth may still have a chance if they are able to prove that the error was ne of trivial discrepancy. As stated under IJCP 600 article 30(b), the IJCP do allow certain discrepancies. However, what is meant by trivial is unclear. In Glencore International AG v Bank of China, the word branch which was used instead of brand was tound to be merely an error whereas the court w as not as generous in Beyene v Irving Trust Co. , where the bill of lading which had misspelled Mohammed Soran instead of Mohammed Sofan was rejected.It is therefore not certain whether Macbeth will be able to reply on this but chances are it appears to be very slim. b) As explained in question (a), the bank will have to put up with strict compliance when handling with the documents presented by the beneficiaries and they reserve the right to reject the documents when following their own Judgment and feels that it does not comply with the terms and conditions of the letter of credit.In this second situation, it not much about an accepting or rejecting documents matter but one which involves fraud. An amendment has been made to the bill of lading by someone to change the date of shipment from 2 February to 31 January and although it has een clearly stated that Macbeth was not responsible for this amendment, he may still be liable for fraud under misrepresentation if he carries on to seek for payment as he was aware of the alteration.In the case Standard Chartered Bank v Pakistan National Shipping Corpn, it was held that there will be fraud if the beneficiary or their agent presents documents knowing they contain untrue statements and intending they should be acted on by the person receiving the documents and it will not matter whatever their motive was. It will be a totally different issue however here the beneficiary or the agent was not aware of the untruth and had acted in good faith.In this case however it appears unlikely to be so as Macbeth had made a discovery. Therefore, if Macbeth continues to tender the shipping documents to the Noddy bank, Noddy bank will reserve the right to refuse payment if the bank is able to rely on the alteration of the dates on the bill of lading as compelling evidence of fraudulent presentation by Macbeth. What Macbeth will have to do now after rejection is to after the original company where he had bought the wheat from.

Effects of the Constitution, Bill of Rights, and...

Effects of the Constitution, Bill of Rights, and Declaration of Independence People in the United States can participate in government activities by voting and opposing their views. People are protected under the Constitution and Bill of Rights. These documents lay down the blueprint for freedom. As a man, women, or child, you are affected by these important documents they guarantee your basic rights like freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and economic freedom. Lincoln best put it in his Gettysburg address stating, A government of the people, by the people, for the people. It is the First Amendment that justifies this belief: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free†¦show more content†¦They demanded a bill of rights that would spell out the immunities of individual citizens. Several state conventions in their formal ratification of the Constitution asked for such amendments; others ratified the Constitution with the understanding that the amendments would be offered. On September 25, 1789, t he First Congress of the United States therefore proposed to the state legislatures 12 amendments to the Constitution that met arguments most frequently advanced against it. The first two proposed amendments, which concerned the number of constituents for each Representative and the compensation of Congressmen, were not ratified. Articles 3 to 12, however, ratified by three-fourths of the state legislatures, constitute the first 10 amendments of the Constitution, known as the Bill of Rights. The Constitution of America was implemented with the following words, We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. Though the Constitution of America was integrated on a democratic basis, the American leaders were dou btful as to its validity. They had seen too often corruption distorting democracy and so, wereShow MoreRelatedConstitution Timeline1067 Words   |  5 PagesConstitution Timeline! There are five particular documents that led to the development and the signing of the United States Constitution. They are the Magna Carta, the Mayflower Compact, the Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confederation and the Federalists Papers. This paper will be discussing these documents and be stating if and how they impacted the United States constitution. Then it will be stating when the Unites States Constitution was finalized and passed and signed. Then thereRead MoreDocumentations That Made Up The United States Of America1749 Words   |  7 Pagesin Philadelphia, Pennsylvania where five men were appointed to be a part of a comity to write the Declaration of Independence and become liberated from the British government. The Declaration of Independence is one of the most important documents in American history. It tells the major ideas that the Founders had about government. Eventually, after several rough drafts of the Declaration of Independence by Thomas Jefferson , a final draft was written and finally approved by the Second Continental CongressRead MoreThe Declaration Of Independence By Thomas Jefferson1670 Words   |  7 Pagesin Philadelphia, Pennsylvania where five men were appointed to be a part of a comity to write the Declaration of Independence and become liberated from the British government. The Declaration of Independence is one of the most important documents in American history. It tells the major ideas that the Founders had about government. Eventually, after several rough drafts of the Declaration of Independence by Thomas Jefferson, a final draft was written and finally approved by the Second Continental CongressRead MoreTheu.s. Bill Of Rights And The Un Universal Declaration Of Human Rights1039 Words   |  5 PagesContrast the Views of Rights in the U.S. Bill of Rights and the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights The U.S. Bill of Rights and the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights are documents that were created to tell the rights we as human beings are entitled to have. The documents were designed to keep order so we can live productive lives. The documents stop us from being taken advantage of and extorted by others. The U.S. Bill of Rights and the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights offers us a voiceRead MoreThe United States Constitution And The Constitution Essay1491 Words   |  6 PagesStates Constitution, this very detailed group of words was written in 1787, but it did not take effect until after it was ratified in 1789, when it replaced the Articles of Confederation. It remains the basic law of the United States then and till the present day of 2016. The first state to ratify the Constitution was Delaware; the last of the original thirteen to ratify was Rhode Island and since only nine were required, this was two years after it went into effect. When the U.S. Constitution was presentedRead MoreComparing The Declaration Of Independence877 Words   |  4 PagesJefferson’s Letter to the Danbury Baptists, The Declaration of Independence, and U.S. Constitution, it is evident that the basis of all three documents is the idea that all human beings possess God given fundamental rights and that government is created to protect those rights. The Declaration of Independence, written by Thomas Jefferson in 1776, is the first of the three documents penned. This is of great importance because it defined the rights of liberty and equality of all American citizensRead MoreThe Constitutional Convention Of The Constitution1179 Words   |  5 PagesMost of the framers of the constitution either attended or graduated college, were involved in the American Revolution, and had already been involved in the government. The Constitutional Convention was a meeting held in Philadelphia between May and September of 1787. There, delegates discussed revisions to the Uni ted States Government. The Constitutional Convention was held in order to address the problems of the weak central government that existed under the Articles of Confederation. Many of theRead MoreComparing The Declaration Of Independence, And U.s. Constitution885 Words   |  4 PagesThomas Jefferson’s Letter to the Danbury Baptists, The Declaration of Independence, and U.S. Constitution, it is evident that the basis of all three documents is the idea that all human beings possess God-given fundamental rights and that government is created to protect those rights. The Declaration of Independence, written by Thomas Jefferson in 1776, is the first of the three documents penned. This is important because it defined the rights of liberty and equality of all American citizens as outlinedRead MoreThomas Paine And The Bill Of Rights880 Words   |  4 PagesThomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson and the Bill of Rights are three things that have some sort of connection. Thomas Paine and Th omas Jefferson both have documents. Their documents were both a result for the rule that Great Britain had over us. The Bill of Rights is also a piece where its writing had to do with a freedom type document written to let others feel free. Thomas Paine was one of the great supporters of the American Revolution. He was a journalist and used his utensils to get the public toRead MoreI Had A Dream Speech By Martin Luther King Jr.1684 Words   |  7 PagesStates nation grow in development and tolerance. The ability to speak and act on our actions will have an effect on our posterity and how they will live and how their generation will think. Our capability to say and protest what we think was accustomed to us by the first amendment in the United States constitution’s bill of rights. Why the Bill of Rights were made When the thirteen colonies were being ruled by Britain, King George