Human Vs. Artificial Intelligence

John Searle said that computers are not really intelligent.Rather they just simulate intelligence. Just like computers human brains are programmed to survive in the society. I agree with Searle but also disagree at the same time. There is a certain acceptable, "programmed" way humans have to behave in the society. A computer is assembled in such a way to read commands and ease up our work. Human brain  is made up in a way for involuntary activities such as  recognize a physical threat, respond and even voluntary activities like tying a shoelace.Even though the computer can help us in numerous ways, it still can not be compared to human brain since human brain is more advanced than a machine. Nevertheless in some occasions like when creating a bar graph a computer can overpower human brains by creating the bar graph within a few seconds, while if we did it with our brain it could take about 20 minutes with all the accurate measurements.    

Dualism

I agree with Descartes on Dualism. Mind is like a powerful weapon where we express and digests our feelings and expressions while body is used to express physical expressions. Mind and body cannot be separated since without mind the body can't express anything. Without the mind body is just lifeless.

Pragmatism and Feminism

I believe pragmatism and feminism are two main concepts of Philosophy which challenges the idea of knowledge. Pragmatism is the connection of beliefs and theories through practical experiments. A person who engages in  religious rituals on a daily basis could be explained as a pragmatic person, but there is a chance he is illiterate. A person who never stepped to a school in his life could be a very religious person.When it comes to feminism, the concept where women have less rights comparing to men is challenged to knowledge, since developed middle eastern countries such as Saudi Arabia ban women from driving vehicles. So in my point of view both feminism and pragmatism challenge knowledge. We should think about knowledge as a method of developing our own minds with the help of intellectual individuals. I think knowledge as accepting your own beliefs while accepting others' ideas.      

Empiricism

I agree with the claim that knowledge is based on senses, but I don't agree that All of our knowledge is based on senses. For example we can distinguish hotness and coldness in our surrounding through our skin, we can identify sweet and saltiness through our tongue. In the same time two individuals can interpret the same food as spicy and salty. When we talk about math, it's the same thing. If we ask a kid to give two numbers with a sum of 5, one might say 4 and 1 and the other kid might say 2 and 3. Since we were kids there are different ways we interpret something. In my point of view, even in Philosophy, Experience Vs. learning is two different perspectives on knowledge.    

Methodological skepticism

Skepticism can be described simply as the claim that we do not have knowledge. Rene Descartes, a well known French Philosopher who lived during 1650's believed in certainty. His method of finding certainty was known as methodological skepticism. In my point of view, skepticism is the way people believe in something. It could be either believing in Science, Religion or believing in both. I think we follow our own believes  in our daily lives until it becomes impossible to believe them. For example most of us believed that kids were gifts from god, when we were kids. But as we grows up we learned that it is crucial for two individuals of opposite sex to have a sexual affair to have a kid. Although even after learning that some people are tend to not believe in that whole sexual intercourse procedure  due to their religious beliefs. So it's just the way we chose to believe in something, not exactly what it is. So methodological skepticism is neither  a good strategy nor a bad strategy since its a matter of different perspectives.  

Socrates-Allegory of cave

 In the Allegory of the Cave, Socrates suggests that, without philosophical education, we are all like the prisoners in the cave. What are your thoughts on this? How is philosophy supposed to be liberating? Do you think Socrates is right to be so pessimistic about life without philosophy? 
           
                  According to my point of view, I agree with Socrates. Most of us are used to do the same thing everyday; for instance wake up in the morning, go to school, come back from school, go to work, come home from work, sleep and then repeat the same thing again. From the school kid to the mature adult we keep repeating our busy schedules. Since we keep doing the same routine, and get so caught up in the same thing we keep forgetting that there is a way to do things differently, just like the prisoners in the cave. Philosophy is liberating because Philosophy is the key to changing the way of thinking with different perspectives, with different angles and different imaginations. I agree with Socrates again for being pessimistic about life due to two reasons; There is nothing wrong with thinking in a different way and nobody can change the way another person's mind see the world completely. Secondly looking at the world in a positive way is worth than seeing it in a negative way. 

What can I learn from my Philosophy 100 class?

In my Philosophy 100 class, I hope to learn about different Philosophers, their perspectives, teachings and beliefs. I would also hope to improve my writing and creative thinking skills through a Philosophical perspective. Hope to share my opinions with my fellow classmates.