If Frankenstein can be perplexed about to what extent he or humanity is responsible for the making of a monstrous intelligence, then so can we feel muddled. What forms of intelligence have we humans actually made that could put us at such grave moral fault? Intelligence — whether construed as natural or artificial — is adaptive to a situation. Chollet reminds us, too, that people are a product of their own tools. Akin to how early hominins used fire or etched seashells, modern humans have used pens, printing presses, books and computers to process data and solve problems related to their particular circumstances.
Science and technology are two defining artefacts of modern human civilisation. From this long view of humanity, anthropology shows that civilisation itself is a kind of AI: a collective set of tools developed over time and through cultures, equipping people to learn from the past for the benefit of life in myriad forms, present and future. Artificial general intelligence AGI is future AI that might exhibit general intelligence, including consciousness. Are we, like Frankenstein, setting into motion maniacally smart devices of our own demise?
Feminism in Frankenstein Introduction Essay
Deep learning DL is a subset of ML, in which multiple levels of models work together at more complex tasks, with each level of model relying on outputs from a prior level to perform a higher-level function. For example, to recognise a handwritten number, a deep-learning algorithm might have a first level to identify where on a page there is writing, a second level to identify edges based on the patterns of the writing, a third level to identify shapes based on the placement of the edges, and a fourth level to identify the number based on the combination of shapes.
With the advent of ML and some forms of DL, are we, like Frankenstein, setting into motion maniacally smart devices of our own demise? Shelley imagined such a scenario, and so do some contemporary computer scientists. In the cybernetic community, the moment projected in the near future when AGI matches then surpasses the intelligence of humanity is known as the singularity. It marks one fleeting point in time when humans will be equal in intelligence to AGI, then upholds it as unique in its world-historical significance.
AGI will press on, unstoppable, to reign as the victor over its human artificers. The singularity is a Silicon Valley revival of Hegelian end-of-history, outfitted in grey T-shirts and hoodies.
It predicts the eclipse of human intelligence by the machines who learned from the best of it. The singularity feels religious, even mystical. It limns the meeting of all-knowing gods and their half-human offspring, standing with dignity — if only briefly — on equally high ground. Sprung from the head of Zeus, the goddess of wisdom Athena led the titan Prometheus up Mount Olympus to steal fire for humanity.
Table of Contents
The singularity is the 21st-century iteration of this myth. It foresees humanity looking into an electric-wired thing that looks right back at it.
Believers in the singularity often cite the wisdom of the late English physicist Stephen Hawking. AI could be good, bad or neutral for humanity. The consequences of AI are fundamentally unknowable beforehand. Like all great literature, Frankenstein resists reduction to simplistic moralism, such as the danger of playing God through science.
The reward of reading it is putting the pieces together to see the whole. To crack the ethical puzzle of Frankenstein, it helps to recall its theological background. This speed was not simply physical. His cognitive and affective development after his assembly, animation and abandonment by Frankenstein was far more rapid than that of humans. Like many babies, he spoke his first simple words at around six months.
He learned language by secretly observing, through a hole in a wall of a cottage, the De Laceys, a family of French and Turkish refugees, who were hiding in the woods near Ingolstadt. The creature is a superintelligence.
But so is Shelley, who hovers in the background of the book, having created it all. In the frame of the novel, the narrator Captain Walton sends a series of letters to his sister in London. The woman who receives the letters — containing the embedded narratives of Walton, Frankenstein, the creature, and the De Lacey family — is also the author of the novel. By taking readers up to the mer de glace to confront the alien visage and voice of the creature, Shelley leads them to empathise with artificial intelligence.
Do My Homework for Me | Pay for Expert on ketpnonenpiosput.tk
This pedagogy held that circumstances drove the education of children, beginning with their earliest sensory experience of the environment. Although the creature lacks a mother, he has the same contextual and interactive process of development as other children. Watching the De Lacey family from his hovel, the abandoned creature develops his intelligence with the efficiency of a computer and the intensity of a child. Lacking full information, or big data, he learns from what little data filters through the slit in the wall.
The creature analyses the input of the De Lacey family through the constraints of the program of the hovel. Like the American-made Google Assistant or the Russian-designed Alisa, he is a conversational agent who exhibits both the biases of his cultural situation and the affective limitations of his programming and data.
Since the real world is the world of trial and error, AIs — much like the creature — might be capable of learning deeply but not well. AIs both learn and mislearn through storytelling. If its programming is faulty, a computer will not process data correctly.
If its data is bad, it will produce a false analysis. W riting more than two decades before Charles Babbage and Ada Lovelace designed the elements of the modern computer, or analytical engine, Shelley imagined the creature as an anthropomorphic AI — complete with the narrow yet driving prejudices, the deep yet mistaken thinking, and the strong yet contradictory feelings of human beings.
Mary Shelley was the daughter of a feminist writer that is remembered in history today. The female characters in the novel are described with beauty, rather than personality and accomplishment.
The four others were dark-eyed, hardy little vagrants; this child was thin, and very fair. The instinctive judgement of the female character was appearance. Her looks were focused on without a consideration of any other factors such as behavior and speach. As the novel continues, this behavior reoccurs as something natural, instinct.
Women were not given many decisions and did not usually have many chances of sharing their opinions and thoughts. This quote shows the few privileges women expected to receive.
All of the female characters of the novel lack a voice, much like the women Shelley was surrounded with in growth. As expressed previously, women of Frankenstein were weak. The relationships between the male and female characters of the novel insinuated males are superior to females. The female characters of the novel play into this ancient, sexist view of the two genders.
- Our Services.
- abortion for and against essay.
- writing rubric for college essay!
- Feminism in Frankenstein.
- Essay about Feminism in Mary Shelley's Frankenstein -- Feminism, Mary Sh?
- Popular Essays!
A well-known gender schema is that females are assumed to be weaker and more emotional than males. The novel is full of female emotions, which ultimately add to the dramatics of the story. The emotions of Elizabeth in that excerpt add to the significance of the trip. The emotions of female characters contribute to events in the novel in other ways as well. The views and feelings male characters have upon some of the female characters throughout the novel prove the female characters to be fragile and dependent. The female from this quote is seen and pitied by a male character.
She does not express strength or understanding of what is going on around her. She appears sad and continues with the duties that are expected of her. Many of the female characters in the novel did not even bother to fight for a voice or seek improvement. The female characters were primarily used as rulers to measure relationships with major characters and major male characters. As assumed from reading the above, the female characters of the novel were not treated as equals.
This demonstrates the clear difference between the males and females of the novel. The female characters were either placed on a pedestal as possessions or tending to expected chores. In the beginning of the novel, a female takes care of an ill loved one. It was assumed that she would be the caretaker because that is the typical female role of female in the family.