Author: Don Dailey
Date: 18:28:57 01/28/98
Go up one level in this thread
On January 28, 1998 at 21:02:23, Fernando Villegas wrote: >Sprry for the long title, but it seems that at least part of the >discussion about this issue just happens becauise a confussion between >human mind with human intelligence andf human intelligence with >intelligence as such. Human mind is a complex design where many levels >of adaptative capacities, beginning with sensorial ones, are >interrelated in such a complex way -including emotions- that in fact >human intelligence cannot be understioood without them. Thee recent book >Descarte's error by Mr Antonio R. Damasio show convincingly that. >Nevwerthelles, wwhat cannot be separated in the human domain does not >means that cannot be separated in any other domain. Intelligence is just >a kind of behaviour we can define as a capacity to solve adaptative >problems, that is, in academic exopression, to solve problems. That's >all. Of course from the point of view of human experuience of >intelligence, any other form is a kind of imitation, something >artificial, specially if we have designed it. But intelligence is >intelligence, no matter if: >a) Operates separated or united to other functions >B) if operates in an organic neural network or a sintetic one >C) if it is of high or low level intelligence >D) if his fdomain is wide or narrow. >Also, on the ground of a value definition, we have the right to define >intelligence only to anything that is equal to human intelligence, but >that kind of reasonning does not go to anywhere, is not scientific as >much does not let room for further discussion. >I think chess programs are Intelligent devices, artificial if you wish >to call that way, but in any sense intelligent, even if they are not >VERY intelligent beyond a very narrow scope. And why ther are son? >becasue they solve not only problems, but different problems. Inside the >chess domain, each posiition is a different problem. To think they are >not because they operates on the basis of rules is like to say we are >not intelligent because we operate on the ground of aristotelian logic >rules, Descartes rules, scientific method rules and so on.
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.