Has Artificial Intelligence Contributed to an Understanding of the Human Mind?: A Critique of Arguments For and Against

This essay examines arguments for and against the proposition that Artificial Intelligence (AI) research makes an important contribution to the understanding of the human mind. A number of recent articles have seemed to question the value of Al ideas in specific domains (e.g., language. mental imagery, problem solving). In the present paper, it is argued that the real disagreement concerns the form of a scientific psychology. The critics of Artificial Intelligence believe that many acceptable psychological theories exist and the important task of the scientist is to show that certain of these theories are true. They criticize AI research because it has not produced theories whose adequacy can be tested by empirical research. The supporters of AI research believe that no adequate psychological theories exist. They claim that the important task is to develop adequate theories and until such theories have been constructed, it is pointless to worry about empirical tests. A number of major arguments attacking and defending AI research are examined in order to illustrate that the real issue is methodological. It is concluded that the present debate is counterproductive since both sides assume that the methodological premise of the other side is wrong without attempting to refute it. A more constructive debate would address directly the more fundamental question of what methods offer the greatest promise of solving the major problems of psychology.     

信任、陌生性和款待

我受邀沿循“思想之路”来探讨共存问题，对建立向多样性保持开放的社会凝聚力的方式进行思考。我的想法是，只有在得到人们重新塑造的时候，作为一种假设、题目和原则的民主才是活生生的。只有当经验都持续不断地，一次又一次地被人们通过行动、有时候还会以导致一些无关紧要的差异的方式重新塑造的时候，这些经验才是活生生的。