Tudor Boloni wrote:
wrong category is trivial indeed, but quickly removing computing resources from impossible processes can be a great benefit to any system, and an incredible benefit if the system learns to spot deeply nonsensical problems in advance of dedicating almost any resources to it... what if we could design a system that by its very structuring couldnt even generate these wittgensteinian deep errors... also, as far it being a cop out, i disagree it clears the mind to the deepest levels allowing a springwell of clarity that shows other answers in record time and accuracy, an example: minsky points to the same stupidity of asking the question of what is consciousness, preferring to just look for stimuli/behavior rules that are required to survive and act, and letting others worry about how many of those rules make up their version of the word conscious...
The problem with this is, that what seemed to Wittgenstein and Minsky (when they had their Philosophical Behaviorist hats on) as just meaningless words that referred to nothing (e.g. consciousness) may well turn out to have deeper and more interesting structure than they thought. For example, they could not, in principle, answer any questions about the practical effects of the various manipulations that I proposed in my recent paper. And yet, it turns out that I can make predictions about how the subjective experience of people would be affected by these manipulations: pretty good work for something that is labelled by W & M as a non-concept!
My point of course, is that they were wrong about some of the specific things that would be a waste of time for an AGI to think about.
They were right in principle to say that some questions are framed badly (as in, "But now show me where the University is!"), but it would be dangerous to assume that we can sort the wheat from the chaff and get it right every time, no?
Richard Loosemore
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 3:46 PM, Richard Loosemore <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:Tudor Boloni wrote: we invariably generate and then fruitlessly explore (our field is even more exposed to this than most others) until we come up against the limits of our own language, and defeated and fatigued realize we never thought the questions through. i nominate this guy: http://hyperlogic.blogspot.com/ at a minimum wittgenstein's Brown Book should be required reading for all AGI list members Read it. Along with pretty much everything else he wrote (that is in print, anyhow). Calling things a category error is a bit of a cop out. Richard Loosemore ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?&; <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------*agi* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/> | Modify <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> Your Subscription [Powered by Listbox] <http://www.listbox.com>
------------------------------------------- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=120640061-aded06 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
