The ends justify the rules
Complicated mental processes are entirely reducible to such simple activities as the attentive observation of statements previously accepted as true, the perception of structural, purely external, connections among these statements, and the execution of mechanical transformations as prescribed by the rules of inference
Tarski 1936
Julia and John are talking about the following article:
The laws of thought and thinking machines


In this post the dialogue is realised by an interaction of virtual characters, for more information please check the page “Virtual characters“

Julia
Hi John, I just finished discussing things with Sam

John
Great! So what did he have to say about this whole “laws of thought” thing? 😊

Julia
Well, there’s a bunch of different approaches 😊

Julia
Either you try programming them in from the start, or you make the AI learn them on its own

John
Would either of those then yield the same “rules” humans use?

Julia
Probably not, there’s still far too many simplifications and shortcuts in the models

Julia
Generally people care more about the results than the procedure

John

Julia
Exactly, moreover we don’t really know what rules humans use

Julia
basically, that computers cannot understand the world like humans do

John
We don’t know how we get stuff done?

Julia
Perhaps I should also go talk to a psychologist or a logician, but: no, not really

Julia

Julia
and we don’t know precisely enough how the rules are “programmed” in the brain

John
OK then, so AI just is a tool we use to solve problems, whether or not in a human way

John
and the whole “laws of thought” thing then doesn’t really matter, right?

Julia
I think we might have to split out how AI is used in different context.

Julia
The AI in an automated assembly line certainly doesn’t need to think and behave like a human

Julia
but research in computer science and in psychology does have to ambition to discover these laws

John
So mostly we’d need to split up theory and application

Julia
Perhaps that would be the best. And AI would certainly be on the theoretical side

John
Very good, the only thing we would still need is a good example or metaphor to make it clear to the reader
… Continue reading our conversations that are posted every Saturday …
Related post
Total posts on the argument
Fire All Neurons!
Mechanical analog computers had their origins in Naval Gunnery in World War I […] mechanical analog computers remained of considerable military importance certainly until well into the 1960s and have only been superseded by digital computing systems in the 1970s.
The Brain is as the Brain does
In the development of information technology there now seems to exist a new phase whereby the aim is to replicate many of these “neural” functions artificially
Counting on the Brain
Despite the evolution of the nervous system, it is not accompanied by a manual explaining the principles of operation …
Found in Translation
Whereas the notion of a “correct” computation is unproblematic … The notion of a “good” translation is ridden with problems …
The Digital Analogy
Computers are only prostheses; they no more do calculations than clocks tell the time. Clocks help us to tell the time, butthey don’t do it by themselves
Thinking in the Box
Even the simplest brains are awesome computational instruments, they do computations we do not know how to do, in ways we do not understand…
Wet Between the Ears
Sensations are received by a certain definite number of sensor nerves, which constitute the only means we possess of obtaining a knowledge of the external world …