Doesn't necessarily have to be Piaget. Vygotsy, William James, or anyone who has thought about thought. So where are the requirements documents and the designs based on these great thinkers? Jim? Can we see your requirements? Or design?
This is a legitimate question but the problem is that I have been talking about this stuff endlessly for fourteen years. On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 6:58 PM, Piaget Modeler <[email protected]>wrote: > Doesn't necessarily have to be Piaget. Vygotsy, William James, or anyone > who has thought about thought. > > So where are the requirements documents and the designs based on these > great thinkers? > > Jim? Can we see your requirements? Or design? > > ~PM > > ------------------------------ > Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 18:52:32 -0400 > Subject: Re: [agi] Steps of Thought Will Follow the Discovery of > Forms-of-Thought > > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > > I am sure that many of us have read Piaget. I think I even read something > by him when I was a kid (and I wasn't a serious reader.) He probably wrote > some articles for magazines. > > > On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 3:44 PM, Piaget Modeler <[email protected] > > wrote: > > Perhaps one way to go about discovering the forms of thought is to read > what others have written about the forms of thought. > Then perhaps use those writings as sort of a requirements definition for > an AGI system. > > For example, one could read *The Development of Thought: The > Equilibration of Cognitive Structures* by Jean Piaget (1977) and > then perhaps gather some requirements from those writings, and then > transform those writings into a design of some sort, and > finally code some algorithms to support the design. > > Nah, that wouldn't work. > > Never mind. > > ~PM > > ------------------------------ > Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 13:48:05 -0400 > > Subject: [agi] Steps of Thought Will Follow the Discovery of > Forms-of-Thought > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > > > One of the problems I have had with the theories that are discussed in > AI/AGI discussions, is that they do not seem to answer the most basic of > questions. They never seem to be clearly related to the way we actually > think. There are explanations for this. First of all computer > programming is not the same as our personal experiences of thinking. This > leads to some fracturing of the principles of thought. Secondly, most of > us have a sense that we have to understand the underlying form-of-thought > in order to understand how thought might take place. And this is probably > true. > Jim Bromer > *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> > <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/19999924-5cfde295> | > Modify <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> Your Subscription > <http://www.listbox.com> > *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> > <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/10561250-470149cf> | > Modify <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> Your Subscription > <http://www.listbox.com> > > > *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> > <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/19999924-5cfde295> | > Modify <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> Your Subscription > <http://www.listbox.com> > *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> > <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/10561250-470149cf> | > Modify<https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;>Your Subscription > <http://www.listbox.com> > ------------------------------------------- AGI Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/21088071-f452e424 Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21088071&id_secret=21088071-58d57657 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
