Faisal Abbas 
In one of the Plato’s conversations, the pharaohs showed the invention of writing, so the Pharaoh expressed his concerns that this invention would be a wild on memory. The experiment later proved that writing concluded memory from the limits of place and time. But the fear of the new and the unknown is inherent in humanity, the search for them. We see this in what surrounds today with artificial intelligence. The least fear of its military and its use in the service of the wars of expansion, water and rare minerals, leading to its control over humans. Especially with his unprecedented rapid and radical development, they will soon allow the personal computer to any user, to become smarter than the general average of the intelligence of any Einstein in the world, millions of times, and what is expected by science fiction literature and cinematic: a human world that is a human being governed by the machine?!
These fears were confronted by scientists and philosophers, as well as an army of “social media” stars, some of whom were in the Distopia, while some of them became a professional paid optimistic, similar to a self -development coach whose customers reassure the future! Among these French writer Rafael Inathoven (1975) is the author of the “Artificial Mind” (Lopserfatoor. Paris 2024).
In this work, Inathovon (1975) confirms that the human mind excels over artificial intelligence. Why? Because it is unable to philosophy. What is its evidence for that? The writer tells us here that philosophy, in his view, turns the question into an issue. It is boasting that he had a philosophical test, in a confrontation with the Chat GBT program, in June 2024, the subject of it: “Is happiness a mental issue?”, And that he triumphed overclocking this test, with the certificate of the evaluation committee that granted the “machine” degree 11 over 20, while he, “Cronicure – philosophical – human”, degree 20! imagine! Full degree! And in philosophy!
The truth is that the issue of the book is essential, but its treatment does not rise to the hope. There is a clear absurdity in the question: Is artificial intelligence capable of philosophy? It is better to deepen the search for the possibilities of redefining philosophical thinking in an era in which the machines were taken by the language of the language, and they were able to analyze concepts and interact with their sects. The writer could discuss the possibility of the emergence of a new type of hybrid philosophy that combines the computational capabilities of artificial intelligence and the contemplative depth of man, but he insisted on drawing unjustified borders between the two.
Not all thinking is philosophical. Nor is it pure mental action. It is an act and emotion that is not separate from feelings related to the body, that is, in the language, such as desire and estrus. Perhaps there is a link between thinking and the identification of Spinoza to love, as it is a joy related to the idea of an external cause. And as long as the impossibility of linking artificial intelligence and body does not prove, the link between artificial intelligence and thinking remains within the circle of possible. It is not unlikely with the spread of the “Cyber”, that the human being enhanced by the machine, provided that the opposite is not: a machine reinforced with human remains.
Waiting for this, existential anxiety remains legitimate, if he could philosophy himself. But with what mind does human beings think of these days, in the midst of its fear of artificial intelligence controlling the human mind? Doesn’t this fear come after it is too late? Especially after it was proven that he interfered in recent wars, in Ukraine and in Gaza in particular. Was humanity gave birth to a person of the comprehensive destruction that she gave birth to, if a person had not had resulted and retreated for decades, and replaced by a wild calculator, and nothing prevents her from practicing a cold blood, and she does not have one drop of face to avoid comprehensive valuable desertification?
Is not this “human” mind that brought us to this environmental and moral destruction, an artificial mind? Do the prevailing human beings today have minds (and hearts), or do they have calculator machines, everything in their view is deals, and only the profits are concerned, at the expense of the destruction of trees, stone and human beings? Do humans think or interact, such as machines, with algorithms and mechanical stachers? Is there what proves that the prevailing mind in all this comprehensive fall possesses the ingredients of thinking? Is the prevailing conflict in the inauguration of this new century a struggle between humans and the machine, between the human mind and artificial intelligence, or is it a clash of machines, which is the culmination of the clash of civilizations, and the way for a conflict between the two machinery: the human machine and the automatic human beings?
