Where do humans become special and distinct from the capabilities of computers? Human brains and computers have been compared to each other since the beginning of the notion of cognitive science for many purposes. In the beginning the idea was to make the comparison to make a more human computer, but now the comparison is more often used to simplify the understanding of the human brain by using the computer as an analogy. The real question here though is, how far off is the analogy? Are we discussing things that are really that dissimilar, or are we discussing essentially different implementations (organic vs. electronic) of the same system?

When considered at the most basic level computers and the human brain have the same essential structures. Individual neurons are no sophisticated or interesting than a core of a processor, or a decision making circuit. There is no component of the human brain that is uniquely human. For the purposes of my analysis I will provide the following criteria that are considered to be components of human cognition that are “special”: self-awareness (often qualifier for sentience), emotion, adaptation, intentionality, and free will/sapience.

• Self-awareness: humans are self-aware because we have the capacity to recognize that we exist and that certain tasks we take have an impact on our environment, or as a more common test, we see that what appears in a mirror is ourselves. Many robots have been programmed to pass this very test, and can recognize themselves with a great level of accuracy. More traditional computer-based intelligences can probably tell you all about themselves.
• Emotion: Emotion is a really interesting concept for artificial intelligence because it is difficult to prove that it is real. Humans have universal emotional states that are somewhat determined by biology, but only the most basic emotions. This “innate” emotional state does not specify what stimuli triggers those responses outside of basic physical stimuli. Physical stimuli are unavoidable because of the fact that they are part of the design of the system, there is nothing special or magical about experiencing pain, as there is a sequence of electrical impulses and chemical reactions which generate that response as being pain. This stimuli is part of the system itself, and therefore is not a uniquely human property. It is possible to give a computer a simulated skin, and when the correct pressure inputs occur, or links are severed, the computer experiences a sensation which it can call “pain”. Other emotions, such as happiness, sadness, closeness, loss and others exist as social constructions. If we did not know that a guy getting kicked in his testicles was a humorous thing to watch based on social learning, we would not laugh. On the other hand, the guy being kicked responds to the occurrence as pain because of the fact that he experiences physical signals to cause that state of alert in the body.  All experiences of emotion are either by something that has been socially learned and conditioned, or through a physical stimulus. All of these things can be trained through programming on a computer. The problem at this point is that no electronic system has enough sensors or enough algorithms to approximate the entirety of human experience.
• Adaptation: Humans adapt. Humans adapt due to certain aspects of biology. Adaptation is partially taught through example, and is partially a factor of evolution. If you cannot adapt, then you cannot survive, it is as simple as that. At this stage in computing, computers are like children, they run into obstacles and thus need assistance from a human. Ironically, it is mostly obstacles resulting from human involvement that limit the ability for computers to not function by themselves. Programmers make mistakes, users do things that are invalid. A cleanly written piece of software that is trained with adaptation skills through complex problem solving algorithms could adapt as well as or better than a human. The only problem is that first we need a better human. It is all about problem schemas and how easy it is to template a situation.
• Intentionality: Intention can be related to purpose. Computers are perhaps better than this than humans. Computers are task oriented and are always moving toward a goal, whether it is a calculation or simply trying to interpret data. Computers need humans as a reason for their intentionality, which is in itself a limitation. Why do you do what you do? What drives you? The flaw for computers is that they lack a sense of accomplishment or any type of self-motivation. It is all a matter of programming. The modern human without the context of other humans would likely find themselves wandering aimlessly for something to do.
• Free Will: The ability to decide what to do and when is an essential part of being human. Do computers do it? Not really, computers do what is prescribed by their programming. Humans are controlled by certain programming as well, mostly their priorities. Computers don’t have free will because they do not independently decide what to do or when. There is a question of determinism here most likely, but that’s a whole field of philosophy by itself. I think that it is possible to give a computer free will, and perhaps there is already the ability somewhat when it comes to computers intelligently making decisions, but that is still in the service of humans, not its own interests.
• Creativity: What is creativity? This one is perhaps the hardest of the aspects to work toward because of the abstract nature and lack of understanding of the concept. Creativity is often an occurrence in the course of creating something. Ideas come from previous concepts, and inspirations that come from other places. Does anything truly original ever exist though, or are we all imitating each other, imitating the nature around us?

The limitation to the computer as an intelligence at this point is that most of the research is focused on building machines to solve problems, or machines to handle specific tasks that humans do. There is very little work towards an artificial intelligence that is only an intelligence and not trying to solve something else too. There is no AI for the sake of a new intelligence.

I would like to thank my friend Oscar for asking this question, which in turn allowed me to finally articulate my recent internal inquiry about the nature of computer consciousness.

Above is my schedule for the next academic year as it stands (as of this morning). Fall 2012 has 15 hours assigned to it at the moment, but that will have to change to become a sane schedule (less than 12 hours). These schedules are currently reflective only of my presently enrolled programs (WGST and CogSci). The reason this post comes about is because this morning I learned of Dr. Croy planning to offer Philosophy of Mind in the Fall, and noticing when I added it that the list looked a little lengthy.

Upon close examination of the schedule I find that first of all, Language, Gender and Power is likely to go away, since it no longer conforms to my planned course sequence for the WGST certificate. Next, Social Context of Mental Health may go away if I’m not admitted to sociology and my interest set changes at all (or I find a pet research interest for the semester). That leaves me with Intelligent Systems, Philosophy of Mind and Cognition, all of which apply to my certificate in Cognitive Science. Still, this is a pretty full semester, and if I am admitted to a Masters program, at least one of those courses will have to move.

Spring 2013 is a little easier. If I’m admitted to sociology, Issues in Social Research is already on the schedule where it needs to be, but if not, it is still an interesting class I would like to take. Sexual Orientation Diversity in Clinical Practice is an odd course that I can only justify under the WGST certificate unless I’m eventually admitted to counseling. At the moment it is on the schedule as a space filler, but it is an area I am very interested in. If I’m ever involved in counseling or any type of social research involving mental health, I will want that class in my curriculum. Theoretical Approaches to Gender is a course that fulfills a major requirement (the final major requirement for me) for the WGST program, so I will likely hang on to that course.

At the end of Spring 2013, my current enrolled programs will be complete, but I intend to by that point be enrolled in at least one masters level program.

So, with the logic of the decision to not seek out summer classes, this brings me to a interesting question: What the fuck am I going to do from May until August?

I’m not sure if anyone has noticed, but lately my blog has moved more and more toward focusing on my academic work, less on hobbies and less on me doing anything resembling having a life. The problem is, I have been in full on academic mindset since last January when I started my last semester of my undergraduate career. From there I was focused on graduating, then I was focused on getting a solid start on graduate school. Now I am faced with the prospect of 3 months with no formal plans.

Because I am a graduate student I cannot fully escape academics, its just not allowed, so I will likely spend some time working on some ideas for a thesis, or something along those lines, but that is not something to be used as the foundation of summer plans. I suppose the problem comes about from the fact that this is the first summer since 2006 that I haven’t taken summer classes and as such I have fallen out of practice with not having academics as a summer activity. That being said, my current feelings on the topic (with the outside temp being about 40 degrees currently), are that I’m looking forward to going back to the free and loose feeling that I enjoyed during the summer breaks in high school. I can’t say that I ever did much with them, but the time to relax and do nothing was always quite enjoyable.

The odd thing about this occurrence is that I suspect it will become normal for me to have breaks during the summer while in graduate school, except when I am working toward completing my thesis or dissertations. Change is a good thing in this case, but the adaptation to that change is going to be difficult, especially if I am going to make productive use of my time.

Some of the ideas I have had for this summer are to spend some time focusing on ceramics, maintaining a garden and perhaps spend a good amount of time swimming or some other traditionally summer outdoor activity.

My past summers:

2004: Art Appreciation, General Anthropology, Sociology of the Family

2005: JAVA Programming

2006: {Academic Break}

2007: Creative Writing I

2008: Digital Photography, Personal Health and Wellness

2009: Introduction to Biopsychology, Statistics for Psychology

2010: Behavior Modification

2011: Advanced Composition, Sociology of Gender, Greek History and Culture

This topic is a little abstract and doesn’t apply to queer theory as strongly as it probably should, but I feel like I can do a lot with it. Queer theory is focused ‘queering’ everything, from identity labels to the concept of gender itself. Through using outside literature as well as cultural artifacts I will create an elaborate example of the difficulties faced by a “non-queer” world, and perhaps give some clarity and a solid representation of the potential real world impact of queer theory, at least in its more moderate and reasonable forms (not that the concept of fucking with gender just to make the conservatives squirm isn’t fun).

Cognitive Science: Literature Review of Cognitive Categorization

After a brief discussion with my Cognitive Science instructor I discovered that I was overthinking my topic ideas. I don’t need to go as theoretical or philosophical as I was going. I merely need to construct a basic “term paper” that is a literature review. It isn’t a major research paper where I have to prove something or put forth a theory, I just have to select the topic and present existing research about the topic. I have selected cognitive categorization because it is something that has been puzzling me lately. There seems to be a natural human need to categorize things, the same is true for how we have designed computers and other electronic systems, everything has a category or label where it fits. At the very least it will be an interesting concept to read about while preparing the paper.

There are ideological issues which seem to be coming up as well. This particular instructor, who has a habit of speaking for a large majority of the class time, but will directly state that she does not like to lecture. She spends a lot of time explaining things, especially her pet areas of theory. This instructor has also decided that since students are not interrupting her lecture to speak up and create discussion, then she is going to instead create in-class presentation assignments to encourage speaking. I’m not sure if she is aware that she is doing these things, but they are becoming difficult to handle and are quickly turning most of the students against her and the course.

The really sucky thing is that the instructor is one that I respect a lot, she scares everyone else and as such, if she is to be approached about the problems in the course, then I am the most likely candidate to do it.

This is probably an irrelevant rant, but in some ways I feel like Windows security could be aided by adding some simple measures of authentication. It may be basic but it may help. If a low-security user-check stops users from disabling the security features all together, then maybe there is an overall increase in security?

A few minutes ago I was reviewing the graduate catalog, trying to piece together a liberal studies plan to discuss with Dr. Stephenson. I was focusing on interdisciplinary programs when I noticed the PhD in Health Psychology listed at the bottom of the page. I had almost forgotten that it is an interdisciplinary program. It is a really cool program that includes stuff from psychology, public policy, sociology, kinesiology and some of the health fields. The program does not require having a Masters degree for entry. The requirement is a bachelors OR masters in psychology, I hold the former. As with most PhD programs, the admissions criteria are steep and last year only 13 of 68 applicants were admitted. The joy of my current situation is that I still have 2 years of a master’s degree ahead of me. I can complete an MA in Sociology (which I am desperately hoping I am admitted to), and then apply to the PhD in Health Psychology, hopefully with an impressive academic record.

Health Psychology puts me on a slightly different trajectory than Counseling, but it is still in the same general area and allows me an opportunity for licensure, which is a big step in becoming a counselor or psychologist. I am still very attracted to psychology for the behavior science aspects, but the clinical diagnosis aspects are still a bit of a turn off. I am a big fan of letting as many people as possible in society carry the label of “normal”, and I would very much like to help individuals who find themselves somewhere other than normal by societies definition to cope with their difference.

I don’t know if I will even be admitted to the PhD program in 2 years, or if I will be admitted to Sociology this year, but I can certainly dream.

I have been thinking about things ever since I received the notification that all people who would be invited had already been sent invitations. Last week when I wrote the other blog post about the possible masters programs I had almost talked myself out of wanting to enroll in the program, until today when I got the message and realized that this changes everything. This changes all of my plans and means that my other applications are no longer as backup plans, but might have to be put into place as my primary program. The thing that bothers me worst at the moment is the fact that I must now wait an entire year before applying to counseling again, as they only admit once per year. But how will that work with other programs? IF I am accepted to Sociology, will I really want to go into counseling after spending a year working toward a degree in sociology? Somehow I doubt it.

It is so strange how little things like emails can change an entire perspective on life and force a reconsideration of plans and goals.

Every bit of this plan has been skewed. Initially I was rejected by the cognitive science program because I did not have a clear plan of what I wanted to accomplish with it, then I decided that the Clinical/Community Psych program was basically for stiff over-achievers, which also nullified the Clinical Health Psych Ph.D. idea for me.

What has now occurred is I was admitted to Gender, Sexuality and Women’s Studies (WGST) instead of Cognitive Science (GCOG), then I was admitted to Cognitive Science as well. Now I am in both programs and intend to complete both of them. The hole this leaves open in my plan is that I no longer have a narrow focus. I was originally going to primarily focus on the human cognition side of cognitive science, as I had long ago left computer science behind, and then move on to a mental health field. Now, the WGST program has exposed me to so much social science and social issues material that I don’t want to work on Cog Sci from the perspective of a humanities program, I want to approach it from the computer science side a bit, although from more of an information systems perspective than true computer science. Also, WGST has renewed my interest in social sciences, but not necessarily from the perspective of psychology (which tends to be an overly general field of science). After all of these changes, what Master’s program do I need to be in? Where do I fit?

I have been asking myself that question for the last several weeks as admissions deadlines have become closer. I have applied to counseling and sociology, and I know I could be happy in either of those fields, but I worry about my chances of being admitted as well as my level of fit with the programs. For counseling I will know by the end of the month if I have been rejected (but I won’t know until March or April if I have been accepted). For sociology, I guess it is up to Dr. Moller to decide when I will know my fate. As for my other concerns, I have been looking into several different programs, trying to determine where I fit in and what will work best for me.

• Master of Arts in Counseling – this program is the first that came to mind after giving up on C/C Psych. It encompasses everything that I like about psychology, but leaves out some of the more morally concerning aspects (such as dependency on diagnostic labels). My fear with this program is that it is practicum based, not thesis based. I can complete a thesis if I like, but the program is not designed for that outcome. I fear I will have to give up my research interests for a purely instructional education style. Also, there are rules for the program requiring “professional dress”. I think this is an interesting thing coming from a counseling program. I am all for dressing cleanly and presenting a positive image, but I do believe that ultimately in a graduate program, we are just students and should not be subjected to that type of requirement.  The final concern I have is that the program is 60 credit hours. That is a lot of hours for a Masters program. Most are from 30-45 hours. In the time it would take me to complete the MA in Counseling I could complete 2 other programs, or a single MA and have a strong start on a Ph.D. program.
• Master of Arts in Sociology – this program became option #2 after I started getting into gender studies and things of that sort with the WGST program. It will allow me to engage in thesis research and follow topics of personal interest in the field of sociology. I feel like I am a good fit for the program, but the low number of seats available makes me question my chances of being admitted. Still, I desperately want in to this program. It seems like the best place for me with the highest chance of me completing with my personality intact.
• Master of Science in Information Technology – this program is sort of funny for me. I ran from this department (Software and Information Systems) in 2007 and didn’t look back. I did not enjoy my initial time in the department, but this program grabs my eye. It is interesting and covers primarily topics that excite me, such as Human Computer Interaction and Software Design. The program is very flexible, with the option of completing a concentration or a thesis. It is conceivable that I could complete this program with a concentration of cognitive science (using the thesis option) and build upon the graduate certificate.
• Master of Arts in Liberal Studies – this program is and has been defined for a long time as my backup plan. If all else falls through, this is where I can put my effort. This program is open-ended. I can design my program however I want and fill it with whatever courses I want. The program is completed with a thesis or a project, so that works out, but I’m not entirely sure where it fits in my overall plans. One thing I have considered with this program is applying to it even if I do get accepted to another program, having it as a place to put my special interests. If I am admitted to sociology or counseling it is a place to put an extension of my work in cognitive science, if I am admitted to Information Technology it is a place to put an extension of my work in gender studies.

There is a sense of urgency for being admitted to a program. Most programs admit only once per year, in Fall, and there is a concern regarding the number of hours I accumulate. I am only allowed to transfer 6 hours into any program that I am admitted to, even though it is at the same institution. The good news is that if I am admitted into 2 programs, I can transfer 6 hours into each program, but at 9 hours per semester, that doesn’t go very far. I am prepared to accept that each of my certificates will hold 6 hours that do not get allocated to any other program, so that’s 12 hours I don’t have to account for, but by the time I have 24 graduate hours (12 + 6 for each MA)  I need to have a clue what I am doing as far as a Master’s program. Another concern, although more minor, is that I only have 6 years from the first credit earned toward a program to complete the program. As I have already completed hours toward sociology, electives for counseling and have started on hours toward the IT degree the clock is already running on my hours. Additionally, any hours that I wish to transfer to a doctoral program must be used within 8 years of being earned, but that is a lesser concern because they will likely be upper level hours completed in a master’s program.

Posted from Bessemer City, North Carolina, United States.

• Is the human brain or an artificial intelligence a more effective decision-making system? — This topic is very basic, and very subjective. I think I can write an effective paper on the topic by approaching the question theoretically and establishing what has to be considered to even know what an effective decision-making system is. Once I have established my own position based on available published work on the topic of decision making systems I can begin to form an argument for one system or the other. Each has clear advantages, but which one is overall more effective?
• Artificial Neural Networks as an approach to Artificial Intelligence — This one is simplistic. Essentially looking at the micro-level implementation of independent systems that form a larger system for addressing large tasks. Mechanically, this approach duplicates the human brain. Is this a good approach? It works for biological organisms, but biological organisms in themselves are designed to function that way, electronic systems are not. Are neural networks the wrong approach for artificial intelligence and artificial cognition?
• What is intelligence? — This topic is completely philosophical in nature. It has been approached by every major philosopher and theorist that has ever conceived of knowledge or knowing. I don’t know that I could handle it in the 10 pages I’m given, nor do I feel comfortable with the level of understanding I presently have of intelligence. If I did this now, as an introductory cognitive science student it would be perhaps the most ballsy thing I could do, and would ultimately result in me considering the question in every course in the Cognitive Science program, most likely ending with me completing a thesis on the topic as my final course. It would be a big step, but I’m not sure I want to go there.
• Can artificial intelligence be considered a true intelligence? — This one is also philosophical, but it is a somewhat less covered topic, and one in a little narrower scope than taking on the whole field of epistemology.  I would have to tangentially address “what is intelligence?”, but in a much lighter form. For this paper I would take on the opinions and positions of theorists before me and address the concept of artificial intelligence really being intelligence from one or more pre-existing theories. The idea behind this paper from my perspective is addressing if any artificial system can ever truly be considered intelligent. Artificial intelligence is based on many complex calculations based on available data, but every decision is based upon programmed instructions that have been written to handle a wide variety of situations and provide adaptations for unexpected occurrences.
• Is free-will important to intelligence? — This topic is moving from philosophical to very philosophical. It is similar to the question of if artificial intelligence can be considered a true intelligence in that it considers if a programmed entity can ever have free will. This topic also questions the limitations of what an artificial intelligence can do.  When do we consider an artificial intelligence as having free will? When it refuses to follow an instruction? When a personal assistant AI decides it wants to play guitar instead? This topic really isn’t all that well formed yet, but I think it may have some potential.

Posted from Charlotte, North Carolina, United States.