While Reading Cyrano De Bergerac, I Found Myself Often Wondering Wheth

While reading Cyrano de Bergerac, I found myself often wondering whether or not Cyrano had led a happy life. Actually, I never once wondered that, but that is irrelevant, because Cyranos happiness is the focus of this essay. Was he happy? Truth be told, I cannot say for sure. If we look upon his life, it would seem that he was a bit of a martyr, always sacrificing his happiness for the sake of others. This is probably the case, but I do not believe that he led his life with his happiness as any sort of goal. That will be a defining case in my argument. What I really believe is that he simply did not care about his happiness. In that sense, he did not so much sacrifice it, as he annexed and divided it when he saw fit. To a further extent, this apathy towards himself probably came from a low self-worth, almost certainly spawned not from his elephantine nose, but the fair maiden Roxanne. Finally, the nose itself, the very icon of de Bergerac, was probably not the problem that Cyrano bel ieved it to be. All of this, however obscure it may seem, is crucial to the question posed of me now. Cyranos happiness was not viewed by him with either a favor or a goal. I cannot believe that Cyrano cared about his own happiness whatsoever. Really, that apathy would probably be the only way that he could emotionally accept his dangerously selfless undertakings. Case in point, his giving of Roxanne to the incredibly undeserving Christian. No real happiness in that action. Roxanne and Christians, maybe, but certainly not his own, and he loved Roxanne. Had Cyrano actually wanted to be happy, the pangs of grief that he would feel as he gave her away would certainly have ripped him apart. But if Cyrano convinced himself that he did not care about his own happiness, then it would at least take the edge off of those bitter emotions that surely plagued his soul whenever he saw his loves face. This triggered diffidence, with all the sacrifice that Cyrano made, may have been the only defense mechanism that he had. Continuing on from Cyranos carelessness for his happiness, we may easily make a jump to his sense of self-worth. Any man who would sacrifice his own love, thus, his entire world, for the sake of his rival cannot have a concern for himself. Cyrano cared for his own fate much like he cared for his enjoyment. That is to say, not at all. He did not feel that he deserved such things as the love of a beautiful woman, or the approval of his peers. Those things were not for him, so he believed. But, with his ideas of reward, I really must wonder. Suppose the one he loved was not so fair, not so charming, and not so damned selective about her partners appearance? Could not Roxanne herself be at some fault for Cyranos incredibly low sense of self worth? Cyrano believed that Roxanne would find him repulsive, what with his nose, should he try to court her. He was right, you know. Do you really think that Roxanne would have accepted Cyranos poetry as valid, much less been able to read it without being influenced by his appearance? Thats doubtful, considering he had to filter his verse through dull-witted Christian before Roxanne would accept such things. Had the object of his affection been a tick less picky about appearance, Cyrano might have not felt so badly about his own appearance. As it is, he was never given that chance. The nose. No matter what chain of reasoning you follow from Cyrano, it always leads back to his nose. That prominent barricade of flesh and cartilage, always in his path. Was it really? Cyranos nose truly did prevent him from attaining a relationship with Roxanne, but, from this, he applied rejection to most everything else. The nose, quite possibly, was only a real barrier because Cyrano made it so. The only ones who thought less of Cyrano for his nose were arrogant fools, much like Roxanne, whom were quickly and efficiently dispatched. But, Cyrano still let his shrunken ego

Turing Test essays

Turing Test essays Electrical impulses fire through the brain at high speeds, lighting up the dark recesses and grooves within to produce what we call intelligent thought. For centuries, humans have grasped onto our notion of intelligence as belonging to us and us alone. However, as we wave goodbye to the 20th century and begin our long trek into the new millenium, our ideas of what is considered to be intelligence are rapidly changing. With the birth of the computer age, we have created what is considered by many as artificial intelligence. What makes some people believe the computers we have constructed have this thing called artificial intelligence? One man, Turing, says a computer has reached a level of intelligence when it is capable of fooling a human into thinking the computer is also a human. When one looks closely at what Turing has to say for the case of AI, it is clear to see that his test proves nothing. This test for intelligence has been dubbed by many as the Turing Test and the process is amazingly simple. A human (also known as the Interrogator) converses with either another person or a computer who is situated in another room. The Interrogator has no idea what they are speaking to. Through the conversation (which is happening via computer), the Interrogator is supposed to conclude whether or not they are speaking with a computer or a human. If the computer fools the Interrogator into thinking it was another person, then it has won the test and is deemed intelligent. Turings argument is essentially valid. He argues that if something can fool a human being, it must possess some form of intelligence. It can be accepted by many people that if Bob could fool a person into believing something which is not true, then Bob must be smarter or have more intelligence than the person whom he fooled. If that could be said for Bob, than why not for a computer? But this is where Turings test begins to become untrue...