Is the Creation of Artificial Humans with Human Ability Real

The essay will evaluate the two arguments and give a personal supported opinion that is against computationalism, the reason being the impossibility of scientists to create systems similar to humans’, thus the weakness of Dennett’s argument. Dennett (1994) argues that someday, robots will be made that will be able to function just like humans do. To him, human beings are …a sort of robot ourselves…with extraordinarily complex self-controlling, self-sustaining physical mechanisms, designed by natural selection… He admits that it is a wild ambition to imagine that human replication can succeed in triumphing over nature by creating an artificial human, but it is not unachievable. The main point of his argument is based on his perspective that a consciousness machine is in no way different from a perpetual one in that both can be programmed to execute specific functions by use of physical processes. The only constriction that [his] project would encounter are the expensive costs of assembling billions of minute mechanisms to direct the robots’ actions.
First of all, a robot is a material thing, whereas it is common sense that consciousness requires materialism to exist, a theory of dualism. What this means is that what a man can create will only utilize materials such as metals, plastic, wires, chips and so on, but these are never going to make anything with the ability to think on its own. The reason for that is because there is more to the human being than just the material part. the mind which is not physical, and that is what controls intelligence. Dennett counters this perspective as follows. he defines the notion of immaterial stuff as mere superstition since all body processes are today defined and explained and understood through today’snbsp.biology (Dennett, 1994).nbsp.