Author: Daniel Clausen
Date: 09:55:40 06/27/01
Go up one level in this thread
Hi On June 27, 2001 at 00:33:26, derrick gatewood wrote: >What exactly *is* intelligence? > >According to Websters: > >Main Entry: in·tel·li·gence >Pronunciation: in-'te-l&-j&n(t)s >Function: noun >Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French, from Latin intelligentia, from >intelligent-, intelligens intelligent >Date: 14th century >1 a (1) : the ability to learn or understand or to deal with new or trying >situations. > >To learn or understand.... One might argue that this defines a term by introducing a new undefined term. While the term 'learn' sounds clear to me, I have difficulties to define 'understand' w/o using the term 'intelligence'. Most people imply that you have to be intelligent in order to understand something. While circular definitions can be fun, they're often not particularly helpful. (Hi GNU! =) >Chess programs do neither. Actually they do learn. I agree that 'marking openings as bad when loosing a game and trying a different opening next time' sounds trivial, but it _is_ a way of learning. (at least according to my definition of 'learning') Since Webster defines intelligence as the ability to learn or to XXX or to YYY and chess programs _do_ learn (at least some) they are intelligent according to Webster. :) Of course, if you define intelligence as something a computer is not cabable of, or as (one of) the differences between humans and computers, no computer will ever be considered intelligent. It can't be, because of the definition. Regards, Sargon
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.