On these monogamous birds, it only describe their character in rasing thier young with their partner. They do not confine themselves to only one mate. Likelywise human also cheat on their spouses.

What you mean here is materialism.

I hope I do not deviate too far from this thread, if we wish to know if AI is possible in the near future, need to grasp the concept of what is mind, matter and their interaction. Instead of answering whether I am agreeing or disagreeing, I would like to bring up some philosophy ideas:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Materialism
In philosophy the theory of materialism holds that the only thing that exists is matter; that all things are composed of material and all phenomena (including consciousness) are the result of material interactions. In other words, the ultimate nature of reality is based on physical substances. Mind is just a consequences of the physical interaction between neurotransmitters within the neural network.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idealism
In contrast, idealism is the philosophical theory which maintains that the ultimate nature of reality is based on the mind. Immanuel Kant claims that the only things which can be directly known for certain are just ideas (abstraction). Physical world does not really exist; everything is just a perception.

Materialism states that matters gives raise to mind, idealism states that mind gives raise to the perception of physical world. Which one is more accurate? The answer lies within quantum mechanic discovery......

1) All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force...We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent Mind. This Mind is the matrix of all matter. - Max Planck (German theoretical Physicist who originated quantum theory, 1858-1947)
2) What we observe is not nature herself, but nature exposed to our method of questioning - Werner Heisenberg
3) A particle quality (momentum, location, physical entities) is not predetermined but defined by the very mind that perceives it - Werner Heisenberg in uncertainty principle
4) Anyone who is not shocked by quantum theory has not understood it - Neils Bohr

Max Planck, Neils Bohr, Heisenberg and Erwin Schrodinger, all are famous physicists in quantum mechanic.

One thing which I find amazing is after reading through some of the topics on modern physics, AI by latest physicists, a few new authors cross reference quantum mechanic (modern physics) with Zen (eastern oriental philosophy) which was nearly 3 thousand years old.

1) Reality is defined by the mind that is observing it - Zen
2) All that we are is the result of what we have thought, the mind is everything - Zen

Food for thought:
A waterfall that is 1km in height is a fact, a waterfall that is beautiful is a perception. Without mind, does the waterfall exists?

Do we human understand what is mind and what is brain? Or we perceive we know them through science??

Nope, I am not and I know you are joking

Descartes arrives at a single principle: thought exists. Thought cannot be separated from me, therefore, I exist. For him, one's mind that doubted proved one's existence and this is happening only on human. He believed animals do not has such capability, hence mind doesn't exists for animals.

The existence ideology seem noble but the conclusion drawn on animals seem not convincing.

What I want to stress is,  the center idea for AI is can a machine "think"? How to define "think"? By using science explanation that neural network exists and give raise to the mind does not explain the process of thinking.

When I gone through AI's chapters, think, mind becomes the center piece of the discussion, and along comes philosophy idea about existence within the discussion.

The question is not whether the mind is separated from the brain, but whether matter acts on mind or mind acts on matter.

Thought occupies a private universe of it own means thought is a personal experience. If I can tap onto your thought, that means, I can see the world as you see it ....or simply put...I am you. The question is how do I know you have a mind if I could not access it? Same can be said on AI.

To say that you have a mind or AI has a mind could only be based on deduction. Because mind is thought and can not be shared as we know it today. Actually you can not prove that you have a mind to anybody else except to yourself.

the robot oughta find another way to prevent the harm from being done in the first place. duh. you're not very good at problem solving are u?

Very good question. Can we put a rock and Tuesday together. Can we find "Pi, 3.142" in the space. Does it make sense to say I own the number seven?

Seven is an abstract idea. It can be illustrated using monitor screen, from the toy number seven, or written on a blackboard. We can not say a chalk (matter) gives raise to seven as seven is an idea and non physical.

Similary, we can not immediately adopt the materialism/reductionism approach in saying that matters would give raise to mind.

Matter is physical and occupying spaces and could be located. While mind is a holistic idea that can not be located in space, and can not be measured.

In a more philosophical explaination, should Latin language was not documented, and non of the Latin citizen exists now, hence we would normally say that Latin language is dead.

We can not say that we can find Latin language (abstract idea) on a physical body of a Latin citizen (matters), as this is a wrong approach.

Latin language is a holistic idea and can not be equate to a physical body (matters) in reductionism.

Same can be said to mind and matter. Mind is a holistic view of an abstract idea of thought and can not be bridge directly to physical matter in reductionism.

Consider asking the following question, is mind attached to a brain cell, a group of cells, or the entire brain? This is the wrong question to begin with.