Author: Terry Ripple
Date: 06:32:07 10/17/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 17, 2002 at 07:16:40, Graham Laight wrote: >On October 16, 2002 at 22:50:04, Terry Ripple wrote: > >>On October 16, 2002 at 11:34:08, Graham Laight wrote: >>>There. That's dealt with that list. >>> >>>-g >>>-------------------------- >> >>All the things you mentioned i believe are not following this statement: >> >>"Intelligence is the ability to face problems in an unprogrammed (creative) >>manner.” > >Ha! > >As if that's what humans do! > >Humans may be able to do "analogical reasoning" (using knowledge from one field >of expertise in a different field) - but so can computers. > >Sherlock Holmes is supposed to do "Deductive Reasoning", but in EVERY INSTANCE I >have looked at where he make progress on a case, he CLEARLY uses ABDUCTIVE >reasoning, not "DEDUCTIVE" reasoning. Abductive reasing in AI is represented by >a rules-based system, or "expert system". > >You must know that throughout history, progress (in >science/technology/historical analysis etc) has been blocked because those who >support the prevailing doctrines hold the positions of power which can block the >progress of those who see a better doctrine. These blockages often do not clear >until the current gatekeepers of the doctrines die. > >If you still disagree with me, then here's your challenge: come up with an >example of human intelligent behaviour that computers absolutely cannot do. > >I don't think you'll be able to. You will easily find things that humans do >better than computers TODAY - but then we used to be able to beat them at >chess... > >-g ---------------- That's easy! Computers can't have an intelligent live one on one conversation in real time with another human being on just simple everyday affairs that even a person with an average IQ could do quite easily! Terry
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.