I think they are not... but i can't really give a good prove, or any kind of evidents... can any one help out?

I think you might be able to say something about awareness? I would say that awareness is purely something felt by conscious minds, through their Ways of Knowing (language, perception, emotion, reason). Machines are devoid of our Ways of Knowing, so surely cannot be 'aware' as we are?

hope this helps xx.

School Exeter College

Machines are humans as well. Are you talking about robots? Those do not have the ability to know.

...the za?

What is your definition of "machine?" I'd classify even a hammer as a(n extreemly) basic machine, as well as a pully system, a robot, and a human. We could even describe the earth, solar system, universe, etc. as the most complex machines possible (I am reminded of Deep Thought and the Earth Mark II). But all but one of these are not humans...

School Lakewood High School, USA

Machines as in the Matrix. Machines consist of parts that work together, like a human, or a sentient program. Things machines use that consist of parts are tools or robots (unthinking followers or slaves), not machines.

And celestial bodies? We do not know enough about them to say that they are not machines. Perhaps they are machines, and can think, or perhaps they are the tools of God, but either way, unless we know enough about someone, someplace, something, or someidea, we really shouldn't judge them. I am not trying to be offensive, I am just trying to shine a light in all the dark corners, looking for any holes.

If you want to consider whether or not 'Machines' are aware of their knowledge, you'd first have to define 'machine'. I assume we mean 'computers'?

The most realistic answer is no, I'd say. Although some viruses and some computer programs can give the illusion of sentience or self-awareness, it is difficult to ascertain whether or not they have awareness. If you consider Searle's 'Chinese Room', it's not difficult to realize that these computer programs and viruses are simply manipulating I/O data without any degree of self-awareness. Because we can't know either way, it's safer to assume that they cannot.

Are you aware of your knowledge? I'm sure you know, but how can you prove it to me? When I ask you your favorite color, you may demonstrate knowledge by replying "blue". however, a perfectly valid explanation would be that sound waves from my question hit your ears, caused various particles to move around in your brain, and led to a chain reaction resulting in sound waves coming from your mouth.

Any assumptions of sentience are unprovable because we only have access to the mechanical realm of events. ie, I cannot know your thoughts. So robots? Probably not, but unless we figure out consciousness that will be impossible to ascertain.

School PV

People are machines, by the way. So there's an ultimatum: if machines are aware of their knowledge, then people are too, and if not, then ditto to people.

Wow, a few questions:
-what are "people"?
-what are "machines"?

American Heritage Dictionary gives me two very different definitions:

People: Humans considered as a group or in indefinite numbers

Machines:

1. A device consisting of fixed and moving parts that modifies mechanical energy and transmits it in a more useful form.
2. A simple device, such as a lever, a pulley, or an inclined plane, that alters the magnitude or direction, or both, of an applied force; a simple machine.

We might be able to fit the first definition of the word "machine", although machines certainly are not human beings and thus don't meet that criteria. While you're at it, what is life? That seems a useful issue.

School PV

All people are machines are people and not all people are machines. And as for life, you'll find out eventually. My definition of life only works for me, and cannot be put into words; it is too profound to profane by putting into english.

All people are machines and not all machines are people. And as for life, you'll find out eventually. My definition of life only works for me, and cannot be put into words; it is too profound to profane by putting into english.

guess we have to think about what machines really are and what is meant by knowledge.oh..and why are machines humans and can humans be considered machines too?i think machines can know how to do things and carry out orders and maybe everything else us humans can do.the only thing they can't do is love.they can't have emotions right?

Humans are machines because machines are groups of parts working together as a whole, and humans fit this category. Because humans can think and know for themselves, machines can think and know for themselves. Robots are tools because they do not think for themselves. Tools can be machines, too. So, it is possible for a robot to think and know for itself, and then it is no longer a robot, but something new entirely, that we have no word for yet.

Human bodies fit the category of "groups of parts working together" but the mind may be a different story. Consciousness appears to be a unified whole rather than a composition of atomistic parts.

I would argue that human bodies cannot think or know for themselves without the mind, and that robots do not possess a mind.

School PV

Robots don't have a mind, you are correct. Machines, however, have one. The very threshold and dividing factor between robot and machine is the ability to think, it would seem. I correct what I may have said earlier, trees are robots. Unless they can think, that is.

From American Heritage Dictionary:

Machines:

1. A device consisting of fixed and moving parts that modifies mechanical energy and transmits it in a more useful form.
2. A simple device, such as a lever, a pulley, or an inclined plane, that alters the magnitude or direction, or both, of an applied force; a simple machine.

So, a lever has a mind? I think you are going to far in rewriting the definitions of the words.

School PV

Can denotes ability, but I did not specify that all machines can think, or at least I try not to, because some can; it is a possibility if they are an animal.

can you give me an example of a machine having a mind?i think than machines can know to a certain extent.the mechanical/technical aspects maybe.but a machine cannot feel emotions.robots have been developed specially to care for old folks when their children are out at work.they are able to remind them to eat their medicine on time but they are unable to lend the old folks a listening ear.so what does this mean?

A human. A dolphin. A chimp. A parrot. A rat. Want more examples?

Why must you all continue to use metal robots as an example of a machine, disregarding the organic ones? Some of you must not be reading what was stated before...

machines are programed how the hell can they kno

'Dude' asks an interesting question, are humans 'programmed' by instincts and schooling? Yet WE CAN know, or at least some can.

School AIS

Yes, but at which point is us knowing something not a mere assumption, but true knowledge

Consider the "Chinese Room" experiment by John Searle.

Highlights of this experiment are:
A participant with no previous knowledge of the Chinese language is given instructions on how to arrange a bunch of Chinese characters.

He or she is then placed in a room and issued a set of Chinese characters for him to arrange.

The arranged sets of Chinese characters are passed onto an examiner who understands the language.

Through reading the "sentences" produced, the examiner concludes that the participant has an understanding of the Chinese language.

In reality, the participant still has no know knowledge of the language, he or she might be still thinking of the characters as funny little symbols or pictures or whatnot.

Likewise, does a computer "understand" the information it possesses just because it has the ability to process it?

Tristien, are you mad? Would humans be machines? That is truly changing the meaning of the word machine. True, humans "consist of parts that work together" but that is a pretty strange definition of a macchine to begin with, were did you get that? Most things can be put in that group.

...and precicely how is classifying a human as a machine redefining "machine?" Essentially that's all anything is, and - for all intents and purposes - all the world is. One big machine. Funny thing about Douglas Adams: he hides really potent stuff behind jocularity. Read "The Hitchikers Guide to the Galaxy" sometime, and ignore the funny bits. Read it as if it was philosophical prose. Stuff will jump out at you.

Machines do not need to have a purpose (seriously. Look through some of the old patents in the patent archives sometime. There's some weird stuff in there) to exist. They can simply exist. This is not to say that our lives have no meaning - I'll leave that one up to theocratic discussion, in which I will be conspicuously absent. Yes, humans are machines. We're simply ORGANIC machines. Highly complex organic machines. That's all. We may or may not be more than the sum of our parts; we can't answer that one until we can reconstruct a working replica of a human brain out of nonorganic material (or something like it).

In order to avoid ranting for several pages I'll cut off my reply here - I can pull out more examples and more proof if you want me to.

Exactly.

"In reality, the participant still has no know knowledge of the language, he or she might be still thinking of the characters as funny little symbols or pictures or whatnot.

Likewise, does a computer "understand" the information it possesses just because it has the ability to process it?"

In the first paragraph, Tom, you talk of knowing that one possesses knowledge. The discussion is more along the lines of realizing that one can know, not whether they know something or not. There is a difference, though I can see where you got confused.

As for a computer understanding what it is doing, there is also a difference between a machine and a robot: robots take commands and are unable to think, or they are tools, and they are all machines, but not all machines are robots.

'S-Duck' has a point.
I think that a machine knows only what it has been told. Whatever the programmer tells it, it knows.

The same goes for humans. Ours programmers may be our parents, teachers, or perhaps the environments in which we grew up. Either way, humans may not know that what they've been told is true, but they believe it because that's what they've been told.

School Kinston High School

...unless they disbelieve what they've been told. I take virtually nothing that anyone tells me for granted - if someone told me the sky was falling, I would look at them skeptically and ask them how they could claim such a phenomina was occuring. Currently the main current difference between computers and humans is that humans can be "programmed" to search for their own knowledge: in essence, we can choose our own truth. We decide what to believe and what not to believe, whereas computers are hardwired to believe what they are programmed to believe.

There are, of course, exceptions. Many people in today's world make leaps of faith based off of nothing and believe things simply because someone who told them that they are always right made a claim, acting much as computers do.

School University of Puget Sound (LHS graduate)

A machine can be defined as anything from a pencil to the most complex human mind. The human brain is a machine itself. Therefore it depends on what your definition of machine is, if you want to know if they are aware of their knowledge.

School ISK

Well, this question most certainly requires some thought. Although theoretically machines should just simply follow instructions given to them (i.e. computers), the instructions that they may be given (in the form of software) may tell them to be self aware. But then you have to think: is this self-awareness simply artificial or not? Most people would answer artificial, but then there comes a problem. How could we differentiate between our own self awareness and the machine's? For all we know, our millions of neurones may simply be following a long, complex 'biological' program, just like the computer's millions of transistors are busy processing the program we feed it. Of course, you can say that a machine only crunches numbers, and humans crunch a lot of data, but then think about it: doesn't the information that goes through our brain just get turned into electrical impulses between the neurones, just like the 0's and 1's inside a computer?

School ISK