I’m working on a philosophy discussion question and need a sample draft to help me study.

• 

  AI and Personhood

  AI and PersonhoodSaudi Arabia recently granted the status of citizenship to a robot, Sophia. Read this article about Sophia and watch the video below to see her speak to a live audience. Given recent advancements in the development of sophisticated AI, what conditions would be necessary for you to consider such AI to be ‘persons’? If you would not consider them persons under any conditions, explain why you would not. In your answer, include specific reference to one or both of the excerpts from John R. Searle on pgs. 355-356 of our text. How does he view the idea of AI as persons/potential persons? NB: Often in this thread, students write comments such as ‘AI will never be human’ or ‘no, I do not and will not ever consider AI to be human.’ BUT!!! Note that we are discussing whether AI should be considered persons, not humans. Clearly, to be human means to have human DNA etc., so, AI cannot be human. Make sure to focus your comments on the potential personhood of AI. Make sure to follow the instructions given in Unit 1 in the Discussion Forums: Protocol and Grading Criteria folder for making specific references to texts, videos, and podcasts; posts that do not make references according to these instructions will not receive full credit.Works Linked/Cited:Weller, Chris. “Meet the Fist-Ever Robot Citizen – A Humanoid Named Sophia That Once Said It Would ‘Destroy Humans’.” Business Insider. 27 Oct. 2017. Meet Sophia, the robot citizen that said it would ‘destroy humans’ – Business Insider. Accessed 19 Aug. 2020.“Interview with the Lifelike Hot Robot Named Sophia.” YouTube, uploaded by CNBC, 25 Oct. 2017. Interview With The Lifelike Hot Robot Named Sophia (Full) | CNBC – YouTube. Accessed 19 Aug. 2020.

• Do We Have Free Will?

  Do We Have Free Will?[Before completing this thread, make sure you have read section C in Chapter 7.]In System of Nature by Baron d’Holbach (p. 446 in our text), d’Holbach presents the argument known as hard determinism, that free will doesn’t exist, that it is an illusion. For this discussion, give a 3-4 sentence summary of his argument that we do not have free will, and then give your response to his argument. Also, watch the video below in which philosopher and neuroscientist Sam Harris presents a thought experiment to show that free will doesn’t exist, and then describe your experience with and response to this thought experiment. Does Harris convince you of his position? Why or why not? Finally, if you think you have free will, how can you defend your position? Often in this discussion, students make claims such as “I have free will because I make choices” or “I have free will because I can do whatever I want.” But such responses commit the fallacy of begging the question. Essentially, such claims say ‘I have free will because I have free will.’ In your response, try to avoid committing this fallacy.Make sure to follow the instructions given in Unit 1 in the Discussion Forums: Protocol and Grading Criteria folder for making specific references to texts, videos, and podcasts; posts that do not make references according to these instructions will not receive full credit.

• Works Linked/Cited:“Sam Harris Free Will Thought Experiment” YouTube, uploaded by Critical Thoughts, 4 Nov. 2018. Sam Harris Free Will Thought Experiment – YouTube. Accessed 4 May 2020.