April 9, 2019, by apyap2

Me, you and robots can be TEACHERS? (UoN philosophy)

YOU HEARD RIGHT. I just sat in a philosophy lecture at the UON which discussed Andy Fisher and Jonathan Tallant’s paper ‘What It Means to Teach’.

According to their paper, anyone can be a teacher even robots. Sounds odd, doesn’t it?

Let me explain.

Don’t we already know what teaching is?

When studying philosophy, it becomes a norm to have your ideas questioned. The concept of teaching is no different.

But surely teaching is when the student learns something? Imagine this, Rachel’s swimming teacher tries really hard to teach Rachel how to swim.

Rachel has never learnt to swim. She has listened and tried to do what her teacher tells her but she just splashes around and sinks.

Rachel has not learnt to swim! So teaching hasn’t taken place.

But does the intention of her swimming teacher not count?

Imagine this! An actor arrives at a school. He thinks he is acting and playing his part of a teacher.

HOWEVER, he has turned up at the wrong school. Yet the children still learn something from him.

The actor didn’t intend on teaching the students. But, it seems he taught the children something, right?

Wrong! Intention isn’t required for teaching!

Still confused?

What does it MEAN to teach?

Fisher and Tallant provide an answer!

Instead, they claim teaching to be ‘judgement-dependent’. So teaching is when the student judges it to be teaching.

Given that the student is in a reasonable position to make a judgement, for example, they aren’t drunk and they are paying attention.

So yes, robots can teach if the person judges it to be teaching. Robots may take over the world after all!

What do you think? Tweet us @nottsphilosophy97

Find this topic interesting and want to know more about Philosophy at UoN? Visit our website www.UoNphilosophy.co.uk

• Share on Facebook
• Share on Twitter
• Share on Google+
• Share on LinkedIn