Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: TM LESSON SEVEN LR  (Read 283 times)

uwofresh

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 291
    • View Profile
TM LESSON SEVEN LR
« on: August 07, 2005, 11:32:05 PM »
In any field, experience is required for a proficient person to become an expert.  through experience, a proficient person graually developes a repertory of model situations that allows an immediate, intuitive repsonse to each new situation.  This is hallmark of expertise and for this resaon computerized :expert systems: cannot be as good as human experts.  Although computers have the ability to store millions of bits of informations, the knowledge of human experts who benefit from the experience of thousands of situations, is not stored within their brains in the form of rules and facts.

The argument requires the assumption of which one of the following?

a.) computers can show no more originality in responding to a situation than that built into them by their designers.

b.) The knowledge of human experts cannot be adequately rendered into the type of information that a comptuer can store.


Which one is right?  And why is the wrong answer choice wrong??

theunderdog

  • Guest
Re: TM LESSON SEVEN LR
« Reply #1 on: August 07, 2005, 11:36:02 PM »
In any field, experience is required for a proficient person to become an expert.

If E (expert)  ->  EXP (experience)

Through experience, a proficient person gradually develops a repertory of model situations

If EXP  ->  RMS (repertory of model situations)

that allows an immediate, intuitive response to each new situation.

If RMS  ->  IIRNS (immediate, intuitive response to each new situation)

This is hallmark of expertise

If IIRNS  ->  EP (expertise)

The leap in the argument happens at right about…

and for this reason, computerized expert systems cannot be as good as human experts.  Although computers have the ability to store millions of bits of information, the knowledge of human experts who benefit from the experience of thousands of situations, is not stored within their brains in the form of rules and facts.

So what is the assumption or the unstated premise that leads to this conclusion, that computerized expert systems cannot be as good as human experts?  There was no premise that addressed a comparison between expert systems, or was there?

The credited answer is (B).

The knowledge of human experts cannot be adequately rendered into the type of information that a computer can store.

Which is a defender assumption, or an assumption that eliminates a possible weakness to the argument (that is the last sentence of the stimulus – ‘Although computers have the ability to store millions of bits of information, the knowledge of human experts who benefit from the experience of thousands of situations, is not stored within their brains in the form of rules and facts.’)

The last sentence implies that human experts store within their brains a type of information that computer experts cannot.  This is why the conclusion is drawn that computerized expert systems cannot be as good as human experts.

If you negate the logical force of (B)

then it would translate to

'The knowledge of human experts can be adequately rendered into the type of information that a computer can store.'  If this was true, there would be no relative difference between a computer and a human expert, which contrasts the distinction made by the author in the last sentence of the stimulus

confirming that

(B) is the credited response, since the logical negation of it would weaken the argument.

monkey king

  • Guest
Re: TM LESSON SEVEN LR
« Reply #2 on: August 08, 2005, 04:59:36 AM »
B is correct. The answer A is wrong because we don't know what the designers can do to the machines.