[Guille]

Robert told me that it was Carly that created this forum. I think it's a good forum, for it's theme is important.

Now, the main argument against the posibility of aritificial intelligence is that computers, or machines, can only have correlations between objects and words, but it doesn't know or understand them. Whiles we humans, do: we have the idea of "concept" which is all of wht something is in our mind.

But is this a reasonable argument? I doubt it. First, it starts from the wrong asumption that all of what we know about, or better expressed, all of what we have in our minds, we understand. But this isn't true. Not only there is a big percentage of information in our mind that we don't really understand what it means or rperesents, but actually there are things in our mind that we don't even know about that they are in our mind. So, it is absurd to think we are different from computers in that. Maybe it's actually our error: we have given them existence, we have given them a name, we have given them a whole industry of our economy, and we have given them all of what they have and are, we are their gods. But over anythig else, we are humans, and as humans that we are, we forget. And I tihnk we have forgotten to give our creations the principal thing for thought: CONSCIOUSNESS. This is why they still don't understand or know anything, because we haven't learn how and ewhy ourselves know or understand anything.