True artificial intelligence is improbable.

I’d like to apologise to my opponent for forfeiting the last round. It really couldn’t be avoided. I’d also like to extend my warmest thanks to him for a fun, challenging and educational debate. FINAL SUMMARYMy opponent’s entire argument rests on the assumption we will one day be able to replicate the thought processes of the human brain with computer code. You cannot simply keep saying “A computer will eventually be able to replicate the processes of a brain, we just can’t do it yet”. This is an argumentum ad ignorantiam and just doesn’t cut it. I have already explained numerous reasons why this is very unlikely to happen: I have argued that this is an impossible task as the brain and the hardware/software combination work completely differently. If anything, a computer would have to work completely differently to a brain to achieve the same goal. I have argued that the processes of the brain are drastically more complex than binary code. My opponent suggests that we upgrade from binary to a quadrinary-type code, which is parallel to our DNA. I really have to face palm at this counter argument. Our DNA is part of our development, yes. However, our DNA isn’t what makes us think or learn. The appropriate sections of our brains do. Trying to convert DNA into computer code is a complete waste of time. Any parallels between it and computer code are irrelevant. I have presented the Chinese Room argument, which destroys the notion that computers in their current form will ever be able to think. I’ll reiterate: Even if everything that every person on Earth has ever known was uploaded into a computer and complex algorithms were written to cross reference data across every field and new ‘ideas’ were formulated using incoming space data for true randomness, it is STILL a façade of intelligence. If any new data was introduced, for example pointing the computer’s camera at someone planking and telling it to analyse the person to try and understand what they were doing, it couldn’t. Computer’s only function because of carefully structured logic; Human thought is illogical. My opponent answers my own question (“How do we make the step from “Doing a task” to “Understanding a task”) with his own question (“How did humans make that step? ”)With great difficulty; we evolved from simple life forms into complex ones over billions of years. There were millions upon millions of tiny steps. I will rebutt the rest of my opponents counter-arguments in my conclusion, since they all stem from the same point…CONCLUSIONMy opponent seems to want to suggest that by creating a mechanical brain, we could achieve artificial intelligence. I would have probably had to try an entirely different line of arguments to that, but he hasn’t. He has only argued that one day we might be able to replicate the processes of the human brain with code. I have already explained the fallacy of this. In summary, the human brain is a far different beast to the lowly computer. There is no doubt that computers of the future will be able to solve all our problems, efficiently and quickly. There is no doubt that the artificial intelligence of the future will be mind boggling complex, to the point of exceeding humans in many areas. However, computers ultimately can only do what we have programmed them to do. This is their only purpose. The resolution is “True Artificial Intelligence is Improbable”. I have fulfilled my burden of proof. The resolution is affirmed.