It seems your question stated on the meta discussion level, since that you ask for a reason why a there are two different beliefs.
I can only answer for myself, but to me some form of evolutionary learning is essential to AGI. Actually, I define intelligence to be "an Eco-system of ideas that compete for survival". The fitness of such ideas are determined through three aspects: - How well the ideas describe reality as perceived - How relevant the parts of reality they describe are, given some goal - How successfully the ideas could achieve the goal, according to the current belief of reality The balance of these fitness aspects would determine the personality of the AGI. People like to say that mankind with its inventions and intelligence could conquer evolution and make leaps evolution never could. But I would say that intelligence and technology is just another form of evolution, built upon a different framework. Its just an evolution of ideas inside our minds, and instead of using DNA, they are encoded in neural patterns. I know however some people do not feel at home with this usage of the concept of evolution. They would like to separate adaption and learning from evolution. True enough, adaption and learning could be set up in forms which could not be described as evolution. But my guess is that the adaptive system of a human level intelligence would have to have the following features: - Several possible solutions to a problem, or models of some part of the world needs to be developed in parallel. - Solutions or models needs to be modular so they can be combined with each other in some way. At least it is easy to assume that the world has modular features. - Because of limited resources, some of these solutions or models needs to be discarded if they are not useful enough. If these criteria are accepted as necessary for a human level adaptive or learning process, I would say they seem very similar to how an evolutionary system would be described. However, I could not answer for those who disagree with this, and what is their line of thought, and why they argue a human mind does not use evolutionary learning. /Robert Wensman 2007/10/19, J Storrs Hall, PhD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > There's a really nice blog at > http://karmatics.com/docs/evolution-and-wisdom-of-crowds.html talking > about > the intuitiveness (or not) of evolution-like systems (and a nice glimpse > of > his Netflix contest entry using a Kohonen-like map builder). > > Most of us here understand the value of a market or evolutionary model for > internal organization and learning in the mind. How many have a model of > mind > that explains why some people find these models intuitive while many do > not? > > Josh > > ----- > This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email > To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to: > http://v2.listbox.com/member/?&; > ----- This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to: http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=55624253-d5b0fd
