Comments
http://shennessy11.blogspot.com/2011/01/on-computers.html
http://zmhenkel-chi2010.blogspot.com/2011/01/on-computers.html
http://zmhenkel-chi2010.blogspot.com/2011/01/on-computers.html
Reference Information
Title: The Complete Works of Aristotle
Author: Aristotle
Editor: Jonathan Barnes
Author: Aristotle
Editor: Jonathan Barnes
SummaryFirstly the authenticity of the work is seriously doubted. A pair of asterisks in the title (as this has), indicates "that its spuriousness has never been seriously contested". That being said, I am going to assume that Aristotle did indeed write this.
I believe that Aristotle is attempting to explain the presence of a "soul" in plants. He believes that if something takes in food, it desires food. It feels pleasure when full and pain when hungry. That does not occur without a sensation. After explaining his opinion on the soul of plants, he tries to contrast the traits shared by a human and a plant. He spends many pages describing many different plants.
I believe that Aristotle is attempting to explain the presence of a "soul" in plants. He believes that if something takes in food, it desires food. It feels pleasure when full and pain when hungry. That does not occur without a sensation. After explaining his opinion on the soul of plants, he tries to contrast the traits shared by a human and a plant. He spends many pages describing many different plants.
Discussion
The assignment is to "creatively" blog on this piece, so I am going to try and relate Aristotle's exemplification of plants to my representation of a computer.
A computer and human differ in many ways, namely, in motivation. We are driven by irrational thoughts and desires--a computer acts rationally and logically.
We are the same in how we function, though. A computer cannot function without a power source. We cannot function without food. "You are what you eat" is a popular saying. A computer is only as good as its parts. Our body is made up of millions of electrical signals and impulses--each determining what our body needs and how we should react to the environment. A computer is similar to this in that it assess the environment (ex. heat of the CPU) and adjusts accordingly.
Image: http://library.thinkquest.org/06aug/02309/Photosynthesis_2_files/image004.jpg
A computer and human differ in many ways, namely, in motivation. We are driven by irrational thoughts and desires--a computer acts rationally and logically.
We are the same in how we function, though. A computer cannot function without a power source. We cannot function without food. "You are what you eat" is a popular saying. A computer is only as good as its parts. Our body is made up of millions of electrical signals and impulses--each determining what our body needs and how we should react to the environment. A computer is similar to this in that it assess the environment (ex. heat of the CPU) and adjusts accordingly.
Image: http://library.thinkquest.org/06aug/02309/Photosynthesis_2_files/image004.jpg
I like your point about motivation. Something else to go along with Aristotle's logic could be to discuss the aging of the computer and how its age affects its performance.
ReplyDeleteYou say that humans are considered by irrational thoughts and desires. I seek to introduce the subjectivity of the word rational. From what are we basing this definition? If computers are logical and only do what they are specified to do (whether good programming or error prone programming) are we not doing exactly what our biology deems us to do? We do not consider this stance because we have not narrowed the causality of different aspects of life to our biology.
ReplyDeleteI agree about the notion of the word "rational." What one person may deem rational can be completely irrational to another. It is what makes people so different. A computer does what it thinks is rational, but in fact it can be led to do something that will destroy itself, thus wouldn't that be irrational?
ReplyDeleteI see what you're saying, Evin. Great point.
ReplyDeleteA lot of brokerages and trading houses now employ high frequency trading software that executes a huge number of trades every hour. They recognize a favorable pattern and execute the trade. No humans are involved. This is employed because humans get scared; they get emotional. Trading takes a lot of self-discipline, something many people do not have. Something that a machine would be perfect at.
ReplyDeleteI guess this is the way that I am trying to define "rational". A computer will stay the course unless told not to. A person will get emotional and do what might not be the best thing in that situation. Although, it all goes back to what Evin is saying. It is *rational* if you define what our biology tells us to do is rational.
A couple months ago there was this time when I think it was a CitiBank trader entered an extra 0 when selling a stock (or something like that). The computers in all these desks recognized that and all of a sudden there was a huge sell-off. No one knew what the stocks were valued at and some lost upwards of 20-30% in seconds. This would be a time when a machine fails us. It is still doing what it is told, however. If A happens, do B.