What Computers Cant Do

by Hubert L. Dreyfus

This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.

This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.

As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.

Genres: Philosophy, Artificial Intelligence, Nonfiction, Computer Science, Science, Technology, Education

310 pages, Paperback

First published August 8, 2015

About the author

Hubert Lederer Dreyfus was professor of philosophy at the University of California, Berkeley, where his interests include phenomenology, existentialism, the philosophy of psychology and literature, and the philosophical implications of artificial intelligence.

Reviews

[Dan · Rating 5 out of 5]

Who cares about Heidegger's critique of metaphysical systems in the western world and especially those metaphysical systems underlying the modern science and technology? In general no one, except a few continental philosophers. The story of the first AI research groups from world's top universities can be seen as a huge and unintentional experiment on these metaphysical assumptions/hypotheses. After years of failures, it proved that Heidegger was into something important and that Dreyfus was absolutely right in this book.

Dreyfus confrontation with the AI community is more than a theoretical and academical critique. They didn't understand him and, blindly and with hyper-optimism, held on to their original project; while he moved into irony, ridicule, and personal attacks. The book is technical and serious, but also funny and painful.

The AI project changed a lot since then; however one is tempted to ask: how much is still based on old (or new) metaphysical assumptions about humans, intelligence, knowledge, science, technology, world, and so on?

[Shriya · Rating 4 out of 5]

I was looking for a rundown of the dawn of AI and this was it; it's not the most gripping read but there were plenty of interesting and enlightening moments. In the revised edition, the reader gets a wonderful summary of all progress from the late 50s to late 70s. I'm glad I read Dreyfus' skeptical and perhaps cynical take before books from breathless futurists (although I did read the Wait But Why AI series first, which is about as "breathless" as it gets) - the ideas will stay with me for a fair time.

[John · Rating 5 out of 5]

Turns out he was correct.

[Zane Akers · Rating 4 out of 5]

dreyfus is probably the most hated man in computer science circles. he stood up and said AI is a pipedream. now whether he's wrong or right (i tend to agree with him, because i'm a rhetorical man) isn't so important as the fact that he's opposition. that's how science works. prove him wrong, minsky!

[Nick Doty · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book could have been great and compelling, even many years after its writing at the start of a new field, if it weren't so bogged down in attacking and insulting everyone in the field. (No, I didn't read quite to the end; in the final part, after having systematically critiqued every AI researcher he could find for bad scientific process, the author drags out some rumor he heard about someone's failed project as evidence to support his point, and I just decided that was enough for me.) It is interesting sociology to see how strongly divergent these opinions are, and there seems to be good personal writing from Agre on that point, on the failure to communicate.

[Leonardo]

Citado en La mente Pág.120

[Mark · Rating 2 out of 5]

What Computers Couldn't Do (Back In 1972)

O, if only Minsky'd read Merleau-Ponty!
averting methodo-logical calamity.
Imagine if AI had been Husserl'd,
Robo-gestaltists being-in-the-world.

[Nikki · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book does contain some anachronisms--thanks to machine learning. But a very interesting read, nevertheless.

[Alexe Spataru · Rating 2 out of 5]

Single beautiful phrase I got from foreword:

"Artificial Intelligence is not limited by being mindless, but by having no body."

The rest seems like was written by a child terrified with Frankenstein nightmares.