On 2/17/2018 1:42 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
Keith Douglas Farnsworth. Can a Robot Have Free Will? Entropy 19, no.
5 (2017): 237.
http://www.mdpi.com/1099-4300/19/5/237
"Using insights from cybernetics and an information-based
understanding of biological systems, a precise, scientifically
inspired, definition of free-will is offered and the essential
requirements for an agent to possess it in principle are set out."
"The only systems known to meet all these criteria are living
organisms, not just humans, but a wide range of organisms. The main
impediment to free-will in present-day artificial robots, is their
lack of being a Kantian whole. Consciousness does not seem to be a
requirement and the minimum complexity for a free-will system may be
quite low and include relatively simple life-forms that are at least
able to learn."
I agree with their analysis. They have arrived at the same conclusion
as Hume.
" Here the problem is explained in the more concrete and formal terms of
fixed points (goals) in objective functions. The concept is made
sufficiently specific to quantify (as nestedness) and used to conclude
that no agent can be ultimately free willed in the strong source-theory
sense of being ultimately responsible. "
Brent
Reason is, and ought only to be the slave of the passions, and can never
pretend to any other office than to serve and obey them.
--- David Hume
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
