Author: José Antônio Fabiano Mendes
Date: 05:42:46 03/15/01
Go up one level in this thread
On March 14, 2001 at 12:11:41, Fernando Villegas wrote: >Well, Bruce, your answer widens the scope of the debate. To begin with, the >concept of intelligence as something proper of an entity capable of intelligent >behaviour does not solve the problem as much intelligence as such is not clearly >stated first. Sounds a little bit like a circular reasonning. Nevertheless I >concur with the sheer fact that all this is a matter of behaviour in certain >frames of reference. Probably a way to approach the problem is, then, to reject >from the beginning the idea of intelligence as some sustantive, specific entity >we can define in a sentence. Maybe it is more like a cluster of certain >behavioral abilities in different levels and empirical ocasions. In that case >even such a mechanical thing as to remember is fundamental. And certainly the The act of remembering is NOT mechanical,it is an ACTIVE process,as Piaget showed conclusively IMO. Please see: http://dcn.davis.ca.us/~btcarrol/skeptic/memory.html Saludos!,JAFM >capacity to calculate accurately inside a system of rules is, as well, a kind of >intelligence. And the highest one would be the creative endeavour of the so >called genuses that change the entire frame of rererence. If this is so, then, >yes, we could say program show intelligence in some level. >Cheers >Fernando
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.