PT79.S1.Q24 - Some computer scientists imagine that all...

eeljasonnn

I was a little confused on why C is incorrect. The computer scientists simply say that they think they can make AI by encapsulating the information contained in the human genome. Then the Biologist talks about the operations of the human brain.

I interpreted this as sort of an analogy or something, as it doesn't say that the computer scientists are explicitly trying to model the AI after the human brain. Then, I said the NA should be that the computer scientists ARE trying to model the AI after the human brain (because if they weren't, the author's mentioning of human brain wouldn't apply).

I get why B is correct in that given the argument without looking too much in the context, it must be the case that the interactions and the protein structures are not both getting info from the human genome, but was still confused why the assumption I initially pointed out doesn't work.

Additionally, for these questions, would it be a better strategy instead to kind of ignore the context (some computer scientists believe...) and focus on the bulk of the author's argument?

Thanks!

JesseWeNeedToCook

@eeljasonnn said:
I was a little confused on why C is incorrect. The computer scientists simply say that they think they can make AI by encapsulating the information contained in the human genome. Then the Biologist talks about the operations of the human brain.

You're missing the conclusion of the argument in this description, which is that the biologist thinks that the computer scientists' beliefs are wrong in this particular instance. The statement the biologist makes in regards to the operation of the brain is a premise leading to this conclusion. (You need to assume the correct answer in order for the argument to flow properly.)

I interpreted this as sort of an analogy or something, as it doesn't say that the computer scientists are explicitly trying to model the AI after the human brain. Then, I said the NA should be that the computer scientists ARE trying to model the AI after the human brain (because if they weren't, the author's mentioning of human brain wouldn't apply).

Nowhere in the passage is the speaker trying to refute any explicit attempts of anything. They are trying to point out that a belief is incorrect. Mainly C is wrong because who cares if there is models based on alien brains. That's not what the biologist is trying to show.

The argument is kinda like the opposite of an argument by analogy

The argument the biologist makes is trying to show that the human brain, natural intelligence and what some computer scientists believe consitutes artifical intelligence is not the same. The biologists points out that the computer scientists are missing a component not encapsulated within human DNA.