Programmed behaviour strictly rule-like or arbitrary

A new use of language poses a dilemma for a machine: either it treats the new usage as a case that falls under existing rules or it takes a blind stab at interpretation and updates its rule base. In either case, it fails to behave like a human.

In confronting a new use of language, machines face a dilemma: either, the new usage must be treated as a case that falls under existing rules (in which case rules covering all cases must be built beforehand), or the machine must take a blind stab at interpretation and update its rule base (in which case the machine is behaving in an arbitrary, and hence non human, fashion.

In either case, the machine is not like a human. A native speaker, by constrast, is embedded in the context of human life, which allows him or her to make sense of utterances in a non-rule like yet non-arbitrary way.
RELATED ARTICLESExplain
Artificial Intelligence
Can computers think? [1]
Yes: physical symbol systems can think [3]
The Rule-Following Assumption
Programmed behaviour strictly rule-like or arbitrary
The infinite regress of rules
All concepts are rules
Grammars are rule-based systems
AI rules can't explain ordinary language
Explicit rules are unnecessary
Humans behave in orderly manner without rules
Impossible to write every rule
Graph of this discussion
Enter the title of your article


Enter a short (max 500 characters) summation of your article
Enter the main body of your article
Lock
+Comments (0)
+Citations (0)
+About
Enter comment

Select article text to quote
welcome text

First name   Last name 

Email

Skip