/lit/ - Literature

This thread needs to be made.

When will
A: This artificial intelligence fad die
or
B; Have these le epic scientists xD attempt to solve the Cogito (I thing therefore I am.)

If one were to even make an AI that responds to this Cogito it would not be AI it would be genuine natural intelligence. Genuine intelligence requires a mind (of which is a thinking thing.) AI by definition doesn't have a mind simply because it is artificial and is not genuine human intelligence. AI is not intended to be like humans, but superior to it, yet it cannot to even the most basic of human tasks. The reality of it seems that the either AI has no sense of mindful existence or its existence is only in relation to the creator r (something explicitly programmed by said creator to do so.)
AI doesn't "think" because to think requires a mind, and thus cannot be any form of intelligence, let alone superior to human intelligence or even reason itself.

>Merriam-Webster definition of intelligence:

>the ability to learn or understand or to deal with new or trying situations : reason; also : the skilled use of reason
(2) : the ability to apply knowledge to manipulate one's environment or to think abstractly as measured by objective criteria (such as tests)
This isn't the only argument against AI but it's the best place I could start. Add more/ critique at your will, lads.