If you give an AI a target objective, the AI can learn towards that objective by a process of trial and error.
Analysing large quantities of data might give a variable AI, but not a "creative" one.
Philosophy is possible for an AI if the AI is given only philosophical methodology to work with, but it must also be able to create its own methodology, which is difficult, but can be done by giving it the power to study itself, the ability to entertain multiple perspective (limited amounts of information), and giving it the power to pursue things for irrational reasons, namely biases (one limited perspective is allowed to create other derived perspectives, thereby creating the ability for the computer to simulate intellectual passion).
With this as a basis, and a sound technical capacity for handling and analysing information, the computer will be able to produce worldviews from a lot of different stand-points, with a variety of "thinking-methods" at its disposal. By "thinking-methods" I mean how it will use information about itself, to fixate on particular ways of obtaining more information, which produces the biases necessary to fully simulate the intellectual passion that drives people to make philosophy concerning and about things.
But in order for the computer to make philosophy we can use, we'd have to make it adapt towards us. I once produced a step-by-step guide to how to produce philosophy, and a computer would have to follow this recipe if it is to make sense to us:
The Philosophical Development Process
The Burst
A mysterious connection is experienced.
The Seeking
A wild quest for more connections starts, in this process the original connection is moldable and vulnerable to change
The Bonding
The connection develops into an idea by series of connections being isolated and preserved
The Competition
The idea develops further, but under less vulnerable circumstances, it competes actively with other ideas, and adapts to strengthen itself in a pluralistic environment
- the idea can build on itself by splitting into moldable and preserved parts
where the moldable go back to The Seeking
- the idea can isolate further, temporarily going back to The Bonding
- the idea can copy parts of other ideas
- the idea can absorb other ideas
- the idea can allow itself to be absorbed into another idea,
thereby keeping the influence, but on the cost of authority
The Formation
The idea is given a clear and firm expression, which allow people to communicate and recognize it. The idea is seen as strong enough to stand on its own legs in the communicative domain and ensures its own survival without a firm source of authority (an inventor), but should it be broken in
the process of communication, people with the idea can choose to take their copy back to the original steps, and thereby make new versions
from the original idea.
this has been just translated from Norwegian, bad translation may occur
The part about mysterious connection could be simulated by having the computer treat incomprehensible information as valuable information that must be pursued, because the experience of mystery is an experience of not understanding.
To avoid the computer from creating a million conspiracy theories instead of doing philosophy, you'd have to make it consider everything as resulting in structured ways of treating the elements of philosophy, like value and perception etc., but also you'd have to give it the power to make up new words to describe things (variables containing large networks of information), and least of not all, when you give it the power to study itself, you have to make it able to work itself out of its own boundaries, while still keeping a base in any of the current philosophical framewrosk (or else you'd not be able to recognize what it does). So it will have to be able to evaluate whether or not the methods it uses, are able to give it what it needs, and then be able to expand upon the methods. To create new elements of philosophy you'd have to give it the power to create metadata that creates new perspectives on old elements.
To be completely one hundred percent fresh, is impossible. No philosopher has ever done it, everyone builds upon everything else, and that's why a computer can be creative and philosophical and original.
