Philosophy Forum

Read Topic
Reply

Decision Making

Philosophy Forum
» General Discussion
» Decision Making

Get Email Updates • Email this Topic • Print this Page

Difference between humans and robots.

We are both able to make decisions but humans are able to understand why they made that decision. Robots are not able to. Question is can robot in the future be able to understand the decisions that they make and learn to act differently?

Humans and robots both have the ability to make decision. The difference between a human and a robot is that humans can understand why they make a decision and robots can't. What if we all started to ignore why we make a decision. Would that make us insane or would that not change us at all?

@MITech,

MITech wrote:

Difference between humans and robots.

We are both able to make decisions but humans are able to understand why they made that decision. Robots are not able to. Question is can robot in the future be able to understand the decisions that they make and learn to act differently?

Would still be false randomality...

Created from a finite set of variable's, far less than the one's humans are bound by.

Yet this is a strange place to find a question like this, could this be movedto a better location?

And the answer is no, since things are only made in the present not the future.

SO:rolleyes: the question "Can robot in a future present be able to understand the decisions that they make and learn to act differently? Is Yes

(:detective:It would come to a point where it would no longer be a robot, but becomes human, without a human body, if a person perfectly emulates the every function of a human in every way, shape, and form.

@MITech,

Awareness is not inherently insane, unless you consider the mind to be the absolute factor of awareness which has the potential to be flawed.

@Holiday20310401,

Humans have the ability to NOT make decisions; robots do not.

Aside: the question whether robots and humans actually make "decisions" in the same way and use the same processes seems to be legitimate, especially since we know so little about how the part of the brain that is involved actually functions. Moreover, it seems robots can only make certain predefined kinds of decisions (the goals of which are determined in advance, as in chess); human decision making can apply to completely novel situations.

Aside: I am not sure whether we can ignore why we make decisions (outside of HABIT, perhaps) unless it is after the fact. Isn't the "why" an important part of the actual making a decision?

@jgweed,

A robot can understand why it makes a decision just as much as a human can.

Strip away the fact that one is made from flesh and the other metal and you are left with a substrate that is programmed in some way or another. Humans induce or deduce, namely, they can utilize logic. Likewise, robots can use fuzzy logic to induce or deduce. If you approach the issue from an empirical perspective, both humans and robots use knowledge a-posteriori (after the senses). Look at the common Roomba or that chess playing supercomputer. You could say the same thing from a rationalist perspective, etc.

So if humans and robots are abstractly the same thing, a substrate with cognate abilities, why can a robot not have the ability to understand why they make that decision. My feelings are that they can understand why they make that decision just as much as a human can becuase they are essentially the same thing.

Both a human and a computer are programmed in some way or another. But this seems absurd. How can the human mind compare to a computer chip? Maybe its ego or something like that, something that makes us feel more special than the other. After all, we created the computer and not the other way around. How can the created possess near the same abilities as the creator? But that is an ironic statement? and possibly a good argument for the existence of God.

Some would argue that a computer only does what it is programmed to do. The same could be said of humans as well.

@VideCorSpoon,

The difference is not in knowing why a decision was made, but likely in knowing what it feels like to make a decision.

@jgweed,

jgweed wrote:

Humans have the ability to NOT make decisions; robots do not.

How does a person not make a decision without deciding to not make a decision?

Quote:

Aside: the question whether robots and humans actually make "decisions" in the same way and use the same processes seems to be legitimate, especially since we know so little about how the part of the brain that is involved actually functions. Moreover, it seems robots can only make certain predefined kinds of decisions (the goals of which are determined in advance, as in chess); human decision making can apply to completely novel situations.

First off, I don't think that humans can make decisions in completely novel situations. There must be some pre-existing ability to predict results and an understanding of what goals are to be achieved, otherwise it is random, and even if you consider a random choice a decision, it is possible for machines to make decisions within any realm of possibility. The same can be said of machines and the ability to adapt decision making to more and more abstract realms is a matter of programming limitations and not some intrinsic human quality.

@MITech,

Comprehending decisions is inextricably linked to the power of mind.Human indeed have minds which can philosophize,nevertheless,robots are programmed and is unfeasible to perceive and comprehend.

@Ennui phil,

If robots can indeed understand why they make a desicion then we are all robots.

@MITech,

MITech wrote:

If robots can indeed understand why they make a desicion then we are all robots.

If we are not robots, what is there that separates us from robots?

Anyone who has used a computer should know that they are far more accurate in backtracking and explaining their actions than people.

@Mr Fight the Power,

Mr. Fight the Power wrote:

If we are not robots, what is there that separates us from robots?

Anyone who has used a computer should know that they are far more accurate in backtracking and explaining their actions than people.

The fact that we can understand why we make desicions. Our feelings help us make desicions. Without the ability to have feelings we would not be able to understand why we make a desicion. Robots can't feel anything. Thats the difference between humans and robots.

@MITech,

Ennui,
I don't know if making decisions is inextricably connected to the mind. That seems a bit limited. From what I can gather of your other thoughts, that robots are programmed and thus are unable to perceive and comprehend, I do not agree with. Who is to say that we are not programmed automata and hat we perceive are illusory and what we comprehend is false? the prime substance of Cartesian universal doubt.

MITech,
If the criteria you provide, that if robots can understand why they make a decision then we are all robots? we are probably robots then. Robots use logic. Humans use logic.

Also, we make decisions because we cannot do everything. We have to pick one thing or theater. Left or right, etc. Feelings seem like an irrational influence on decisions rather than the root of the decision making process. Besides that, robots can make a decision easily, and they purportedly do not have any feelings per se. Perhaps logic cuts deeper to the heart of the answer. And the statement that robot can't feel anything does not take into account a computer programmed to have feelings. One could make the argument that that type of reasoning applies to humans as well.

@VideCorSpoon,

VideCorSpoon wrote:

MITech,
If the criteria you provide, that if robots can understand why they make a decision then we are all robots? we are probably robots then. Robots use logic. Humans use logic.

Also, we make decisions because we cannot do everything. We have to pick one thing or theater. Left or right, etc. Feelings seem like an irrational influence on decisions rather than the root of the decision making process. Besides that, robots can make a decision easily, and they purportedly do not have any feelings per se. Perhaps logic cuts deeper to the heart of the answer. And the statement that robot can't feel anything does not take into account a computer programmed to have feelings. One could make the argument that that type of reasoning applies to humans as well.

To extend your line of thinking, "feelings" are irrational, and despite a psychiatrists best attempts are extremely hard to explain. These "feelings" feed logic, as logic alone cannot tell us what is best to do.

This presents a deeper similarity. Just like a machine cannot explain exactly why it chooses the goals it does, sticking to explanations of how it came to its goal. No person can tell you exactly why it chooses its own values and goals, rather sticking to rational explanations of how it pursued the goal.

@Mr Fight the Power,

Mr. Fight the Power,

I do not say that feelings are irrational by themselves, but irrational (non-rational) only when you put it in the same arena as logic. But that is supposing that emotions are not part of the logical system... which they could be. That feelings feed logic is arguable. Are we logical beings first and foremost or emotional beings? That's a loaded question. That logic cannot tell us what is best to do I really disagree with. Logic could indeed tell us what is best to do, though within that particular framework. Logic is a closed system, and whatever you account for in that system could be consider what is best? even if it negates any emotional variables. Feelings could feed logic? but everything else could as well.

Philosophy Forum
» General Discussion
» Decision Making

Read Topic
Reply

Philosophy Forum

Decision Making

Quick Links

My Account

able2know