http://zmhenkel-chi2010.blogspot.com/2011/01/on-computers.html?showComment=1295547566586#c7064573085711736635
Reference
The Complete Works of Aristotle
Chapter: "On Plants"
Edited by Jonathan Barnes
Princeton University Press
Summary
Attributed to Aristotle, this composition is written on, unsurprisingly, plants. In the first book, the author begins by noting the signs of life in plants and reaches the conclusion that since they live, they must have some fragment of a soul. After comparing the similarities and differences between plants and animals, he turns his attention to the differences and similarities between different types of plants. He compares their size, shape, scents, flowers, colors, environments, fruits, seeds, textures, roots, juices, and a host of other characteristics at length. The second book starts by examining the componants and elements that go into making a plant. He describes the complexity of plants at length, and how they grow in different settings. He observes that plants and animals need the same things in order to survive, and concludes that plants must indeed live.
Discussion
Aristotle seems to be attempting to answer the age old question: what defines something as living? He obviously believes that plants are alive, and might even harbor something of a soul. So is a computer all that different? They require energy, they function better in some environments than others, their vital componants require protection from the elements; it seems like the main thing missing is the ability to reproduce (though we could technically program them to do that). That being said, it is still a machine. It has needs for sure, but the concept of wants is foreign to it. It does whatever it is programmed to do at the whim of the user. However, the day will likely come when the sophistication of hardware and software is advanced enough that a computer will ask "Why?" When that day comes, I will be willing to upgrade computers from machines to beings.
Your analysis does an excellent job of showing the parallels between Aristotle's question of plants and ours of computers. I too think the day will likely come when it may be more correct to call computers beings.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Zach in that you have done a very good job of showing the similarities between Aristotle and his plants, to us and our computers. I, however, must disagree that we will ever be able to call computers "beings". Sure, we will be able to make computers act more and more like a human, but they will always still be just computers until they have been created from DNA and are made up of cells. If that day has come, then who is to say that humans are not computers instead of computers being humans?
ReplyDelete