Hofstadter, Dennett - The Mind's I

Computing Machinery and Intelligence 63A less perverse example, it might have some method for drawingconclusions by scientific induction. We must expect such amethod to lead occasionally to erroneous results.The claim that a machine cannot be the subject of its ownthought can of course only be answered if it can be shown thatthe machine has some thought with some subject matter.Nevertheless, “the subject matter of a machine’s operations”does seem to mean something, at least to the people who dealwith it. If, for instance, the machine was trying to find asolution of the equation X 2 -40x – 11 = 0, one would be temptedto describer this equation as part of the machine’s subjectmatter at that moment. In this sort of sense a machineundoubtedly can be its own subject matter. It may be used tohelp in making up its own programs, or to predict the effect ofalterations in its own structure. By observing the results ofits own behaviour it can modify its own programs so as toachieve some purpose more effectively. These are possibilitiesof the near future, rather than Utopian dreams.The criticism that a machine cannot have much diversity ofbehaviour is just a way of saying that it cannot have muchstorage capacity. Until fairly recently a storage capacity ofeven a thousand digits was very rare.The criticisms that we are considering here are oftendisguised forms of the argument from consciousness. Usually ifone maintains that a machine can do one of these things anddescribes the kind of method that the machine could use, onewill not make much of an impression. It is thought that themethod (whatever it may be, for it must be mechanical) is reallyrather base. Compare the parenthesis in Jefferson’s statementquoted above.6. Lady Lovelace’s objection. Our most detailed informationof Babbage’s Analytical Engine comes from a memoir by LadyLovelace. In it she states, “The Analytical Engine has nopretensions to originate anything. It can do whatever we knowhow to order it to perform” (her italics) This statement isquoted by Hartree who adds: “This does not imply that it may nobe possible to construct electronic equipment which will thinkfor itself,” or in which, in biological terms, one could set upa conditioned reflex, which would serve as a basis for‘learning.’ Whether that is possible in principle or not is a astimulating and exciting question, suggested by some of theserecent developments. But it did not seem that the machinesconstructed or projected at the time had this property.”I am in thorough agreement with Hartree over this. It willbe noticed that he does not assert that the machines in questionhad not got the property, but rather that the evidence availableto Lady Lovelace did not encourage her to believe that they hadit. It is quite possible that the