Artificial intelligence in Buddhist perspective
| Date | 27 June 2008 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/14779960810888374 |
| Published date | 27 June 2008 |
| Pages | 172-187 |
| Author | Somparn Promta,Kenneth Einar Himma |
| Subject Matter | Information & knowledge management |
Artificial intelligence in Buddhist
perspective
Somparn Promta
Department of Philosophy, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand, and
Kenneth Einar Himma
Department of Philosophy, Seattle Pacific University, Seattle,
Washington, USA
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore the possibility and desirability of artificial
intelligence (AI) by considering western literature on AI and Buddhist doctrine.
Design/methodology/approach – The paper argues that these issues can best be considered
examined from a variety of philosophical and religious viewpoints and that resolution of those issues
depends on which point of view the questions are addressed from. There are a number of philosophical
questions involving AI usually considered by philosophers: what is the definition of AI, what is a
status of an AI as compared with human intelligence, is there a legitimate purpose for creating AI; if so,
what is that purpose? Buddhism is a religion that is deeply philosophical and, perhaps to the surprise
of western readers, has a lot to say about the nature of human mind and human intelligence. Although
Buddhism does not talk explicitly about AI, the richness of its philosophical views concerning human
nature and the nature of the physical world sheds considerable light on the philosophical questions
stated above.
Findings – The paper explains how Buddhist teaching would answer the four questions above.
Originality/value – The paper is the first to clarify the Buddhist position on AI, and perhaps
represents the first attempt to explore the relationships between any major religion and the AI agenda.
Keywords Religion, Artificial intelligence,Mind, Consciousness, Intelligence,Beliefs
Paper type Research paper
Part one
The definition of artificial intelligence
Human beings are regarded as rational in two different respects. We are regarded as
theoretically rational in the sense that the beliefs we have are held in virtue of our
having reasons we find persuasive. We are practically rational in the sense that we do
not generally act arbitrarily; we have reasons for our action. Being rational in both
these respects presuppose that we are rational in a third sense; in this third sense,
rationality connotes the ability to evaluate the reasons for and against a belief, as well
as the ability to evaluate the reasons for and against doing any particular act. In other
words, rational beings have the ability to construct and evaluate arguments, evaluate
causal connections between proposed means and ends, and gather and evaluate
evidence – that is to say rational beings can reason with linguistic and quasi-linguistic
entities such as words and concepts. As rational beings, our acts and belie fs are subject
to evaluation according to standards of practical, which includes both ethical and
prudential standards, and theoretical rationality.
There are a variety of different definitions of “intelligence,” but this much should be
clear: intelligence encompasses a range of abilities that are associated with theoretic al
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1477-996X.htm
JICES
6,2
172
Journal of Information,
Communication & Ethics in Society
Vol. 6 No. 2, 2008
pp. 172-187
qEmerald Group Publishing Limited
1477-996X
DOI 10.1108/14779960810888374
and practical rationality. For example, a person is intelligent in proportion to his
abilities to reason with concepts; use language; solve problems involving causal
connections, means and ends, and applications of general principles; to understand and
explain complexity where it is found in the world; make viable plans that conduce to
the well-being of the individual or of other persons; to learn from mistakes and in other
ways; to adapt her behaviors productively to the environment, and so on. There are
various types of intelligence that have been distinguished in the literature: analytic
intelligence, emotional intelligence, and something called street smarts.
The notion of intelligence can be understood narrowly as just a set of computational
or problem-solving abilities or more broadly as requiring consciousness. How one
conceives the notion of intelligence at this level will dictate which of the abilities above
will be included in the definition. For example, as John Searle’s Chinese Room
example and succeeding analysis show, certain terms in our language presuppose
consciousness. Reasoning with concepts, for example, seems to require consciousness
insofar as it requires understanding the content of a concept. One cannot understand
anything without being conscious, as understanding necessarily involves the ability to
interpret a string of symbols into a proposition – something with meaning. And things
can mean something only to a conscious being that can understand them.
Now it is important to understand two presumably related ways in which the
problem-solving abilities of human beings are special. First, we are able to consciously
reason with abstract concepts in our minds, such as when occurs when I have the
conscious thought “I think, therefore, I exist.”
Second, our brains are able to solve complex problems that only rational beings can
solve without the help of our conscious minds. This happens, for example, when we
have been consciously trying to solve, say, a problem in mathematics, but give up and
go out and do something enjoyable, like play a game of tennis. Suddenly, as our minds
are completely focused on the game, the answer to the problem suddenly occurs to us –
our brains have been computing (as opposed to reasoning, which seems to apply only
to the activities of our conscious mind) while our minds are utterly uninvolved. Indeed,
this happens every time we have a conversation in which we react spontaneously to
what others say without consciously rehearsing our response: our brains have been
taking in the speaker’s remarks and processing them so that we can respond in real
time without awkward pauses.
This complicates understanding the notion of intelligence in the following way.
It may be that the abilities of our minds to reason abstractly depends on the
computational power of our brains and conversely. Clearly, we can reason consciously
at such a high level because we have such marvelous brains. But it also seems
reasonable to think that our ability to learn language and process concepts has
something to do with why our brains, powerful as they may be, can compute the
answers to complex problems without relying on any conscious reasoning process.
No matter how sophisticated the hardware, the problems any ICT can solve de pends on
what software it runs and our conscious abilities may help to program the brain.
In any event, the question arises as to whether the term “intelligence” should be
applied to something that can compute solutions to such complex problems regardless
of whether it is also conscious or whether it should be applied not only to conscious
entities that can solve such complex problems but also have the ability to consciously
manipulate concepts in something fairly characterized as a mind. As Searle’s Chinese
AI in Buddhist
perspective
173
To continue reading
Request your trial