The Instigator
Skept
Pro (for)
The Contender
WarTurtle10101
Con (against)

The machine can think.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
WarTurtle10101 has forfeited round #4.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/27/2017 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 7 months ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 314 times Debate No: 105340
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (2)
Votes (0)

 

Skept

Pro

The machine can think.

If a machine has a physical condition for thinking, the machine can think. Development of science and technology will enable that.
WarTurtle10101

Con

I beg to differ with your opinion that the machine can think.

This is my first time debating with this website so don't expect me to be perfect, but i will do my best to defend my position.
Debate Round No. 1
Skept

Pro

So, what is your opinion? If you consider machine as the thing not to think, what is the reason? If your demonstration is sound, I will change my view.
WarTurtle10101

Con

Alright so some machines are programmed to do what you tell them to. But others (like what your talking about) have the ability of what some people is, the ability to think. What really is going on is still the programming itself. With enough intense programming you can literally make almost anything possible with the robots, but it is still you telling them what to do. Guaranteed some robots have the ability to make choices, but that is not the ability to think, it is just them looking into there programming and pulling out what the programming says would be in there best interest. The robot is nothing without the programming. It cannot move, talk, or do whatever you wanted it to do because the programming tells it what to do with no thinking envolved. Thank You.
Debate Round No. 2
Skept

Pro

I agree with your ideas except 'but that is not the ability to think,' 'It cannot move, talk, or do whatever you wanted it to do because' and 'no thinking involved.' Grounding on your opinion, 'robots(machines),' and 'programming' can be replaced by 'human,' 'activity of neuron' like followings. Because human is physical being like robot.(programming is a set of physical actions that is implemented by electrical operations)

In the human mind, we can only find the activity of neurons itself. More accurately, a set of physical actions. We can make our choices. [But that does not mean we have the ability to think.] It is the activity of neurons that determine options. The human is nothing without a set of physical actions. [Human cannot move, talk, or do whatever 'others' wanted it to do because] physical forces surrounding and in us tell us what to do with [no thinking involved.]

Do you agree with this argument? I agree if I delete phrases in []. Because we know we can think even though we are the physical being. Likewise, we can say some robots will think, although they are the physical being. Of course, that robots must have physical condition of thought like us.
WarTurtle10101

Con

I am short for time so I will try to put this quickly.

The way you are describing the neurons activity is convincing but there is one part that you forgot to look at. We are living beings, so the neurons don't control us, we control the neurons.

http://ireport.cnn.com...
Debate Round No. 3
Skept

Pro

Yes, we are living beings. We can control the physical factors including neurons 'by activating those' which is why our options are limited to things that neurons can take. I noted these by stating 'we can make our choices,' 'It is the activity of neurons that determine options.'
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 5
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Simple_Logic 7 months ago
Simple_Logic
I think I can break this down logically,

In order to have thought, we need to have curiosity

Curiosity exists as a means of understanding our perceptions in order to survive future events

Survival instincts come from the will to live,

So in order for a machine to think, it must be able to perceive the world around it using senses, have a high level of consciousness (awareness), be perceptually aware that it can "die", and have the will to live in order to prevent it's demise.

Humans (most humans) exist in a high state of awareness, the more aware we are of our perceptions the more conscious we become. Animals exist in a low state of awareness, and no animal we know of has ever asked a question, they are curious and can think but are not very aware of their perceptions.
Posted by SecularMerlin 7 months ago
SecularMerlin
If the machine has a physical condition for thinking, the machine can think

Wow I'm not even sure what you hope to debate about.
The nature of thought?
Whether we think at all or if we just experience vague neurological stimulus?
Or maybe just if artificial thought is genuine thought?
And by the way, ice cream in the movies isn't ice cream. That's right it's just mashed potatoes because they don't melt under the lights.
Our whole reality is a lie!!
This debate has 2 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.