• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

In what sense, if any, can a machine be said to know something? How can anyone believe that a machine can think?

Extracts from this document...


"In what sense, if any, can a machine be said to know something? How can anyone believe that a machine can think?" A knowledge issue that can be derived from this question is: do mathematical predictions obtained by machines such as computers or calculators constitute knowledge? One claim to this issue is that mathematical knowledge must be true because it corresponds to phenomena predicted by formulas and mathematical belief. For example, in the field of demography, models and formulas can be used to predict the growth and decay of populations. Mathematical information is critical to such predictions. By evaluating existing phenomena in population growth, computer models sanctioned by the UN were able to give the exact date that the world population surpassed six billion, on October 12, 1999 years in advance. ...read more.


Wrong predictions also conflict with Plato's definition of truth which holds that truth must be eternal. Once proven wrong, the truth is no longer eternal. Source: "World at Six Billion." UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs. United Nations, n.d. Web. 19 Jan 2011. <http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/sixbillion/sixbillio n.htm#top>. "Does making a knowledge claim carry any particular obligation or responsibility for the knower?" A knowledge issue that can be derived from this is: how important is the sharing of individual knowledge to the advancement of human knowledge as a whole? One claim that can be made is that without the communication of knowledge, people will continue to hold false beliefs and no advancement can be made. For example, the ancient Greek view of the brain, originally held by Aristotle, maintained that the heart was the center of intellect and the brain was simply responsible for the cooling of blood heated by the heart. ...read more.


An implication of this claim is that only one person will attain a certain bit of knowledge. This is not necessarily true. A counterclaim is that more than one person can know the same bit of knowledge without any communication between the two. Someone other than Galen might have conducted experiments and found the true function of the brain. However, if that other scientist had not communicated that knowledge to the community of knowers, most other thinkers would not know the truth. Thus, if knowledge is not common and spread amongst the community, no advancement can be made as a whole. If only a select few people know the truth, there are still others who do not and continue to perpetuate false beliefs, and the community as a whole cannot make further advancement. Source: F., Mark, Barry W., and Michael A. Neuroscience: Exploring the Brain. 3. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2007. 5-7. Print. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our International Baccalaureate Theory of Knowledge section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related International Baccalaureate Theory of Knowledge essays

  1. How do I know what is right and what is wrong?

    Furthermore, I also thought about the rewards of "heaven" which I learned as a child and wondered if that was driving me to follow certain morals and is that just me being "selfish". On top of that, this theory of "rational egoism" also can be related to many examples in the real world.

  2. TOK, can a machine know

    Also another quota machines fail to meet is awareness. Awareness requires a conscious, something only human beings possess. High-Tech machines are claimed to be able to learn, as they interpret and realize patterns; however, arguers say that they are pre-programmed to realize a certain, limited amount of patterns, meaning they

  1. Can a machine know?

    As I stated before, a human's ability to think is infinite and we are not limited as machines are to just one particular function or to the program which is installed. The ability to think also gives us the ability to express and possess our own unique ideas.

  2. Can we know something that has not yet been proven true?

    How can we make claims to know something, which we cannot see? This is why many people find it difficult to strongly believe in a God or a certain religion. We have no visual evidence to prove that God exists but still many people claim to 'know' that god exists despite contradicting evidence.

  1. People Need To Believe that order can be glimpsed in the chaos of events

    atom can turn into a proton and an electron, although they do not know how this happens as they are aware of that the reverse is impossible since a neutron is not made up of a proton and an electron.1 This has simply been explained by stating something as unscientific

  2. TOK. How can the different ways of knowing help us to distinguish between something ...

    But there exists a group of people forming the Flat Earth Society (1547), who believe that the Earth is flat. They too have evidence for this belief: the difficulty of binding the atmosphere and the ocean to the Earth, the behavior of an accelerating sphere moving in a circular path,

  1. That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. (Christopher Hitchens). ...

    There really is not any right and wrong here. Just different perceptions ably justified with adequate reason. Nearly all subjective areas of knowledge are full of examples like this. This brings us to a corollary of the topic under discussion. Possibly, the truth of Christopher Hitchens? claim cuts both ways.

  2. That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.(Christopher Hitchens) Do ...

    While it is true both of these claims are supported by evidence, that is they both support their conclusions, the evidence presented by Messer-Kruse is much more direct and specific. Yet the circumstances surrounding the trial created the established viewpoint that the convictions were the result of a ?witch hunt?.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work