When discussing artificial intelligence, we must not lose sight of the term “artificial”. In my opinion, there is too much discussion about whether an AI like ChatGPT is “really intelligent”. But that’s not the point.
To explain it with a comparison: Is an artificial rose the same as a real, natural rose? No, not at all. If you hold both in your hands, the differences are obvious. Many of their characteristics are fundamentally different because, for example, an artificial rose does not change or wither. It has not grown. It does not have the typical scent, etc.
But does the artificial rose look like a natural rose, at least from a distance?
Yes, of course it does, that’s why we call it an artificial rose. Its purpose is to imitate the appearance of a rose.
Does an artificial rose have its justification and applications?
Yes, that’s why it exists. Sometimes it’s just not possible or reasonable to use real roses. The artificial rose is supposed to replace them as best it can, but as described, it can only do so partially.
Now replace “rose” with “intelligence”. From a distance (superficially), AI resembles natural intelligence. In fact, it is deliberately created and designed to be as similar as possible. That is its purpose.
But when you look closer, the differences become clear, and AI is much more different from human intelligence than we might have initially assumed.
That’s why the discussion about whether ChatGPT is really intelligent is beside the point. After all, no one is claiming that it is an intelligence. It is an artificial intelligence.
In short, an artificial intelligence is an intelligence in the same way an artificial rose is a rose.