Ben, Not sure why you’d even bother to reply to my point – unless of course it’s important to you – and therefore raises an important distinction.
Yes, you, more than others here, will have done some introspection into your own conscious thinking – although clearly not enough to note that it is fundamentally and absolutely different from an algo. [There is a world of difference between human deliberate, struggling, “scatty” (“all over the place”) thinking and the automatic, fluent, perfectly concentrated information processing of an algo – I have BTW just grasped how to convey this and will return to it in another post]. However, look at your book on creativity - there is no examination of your/anyone else’s thinking sessions about any creative problem – i.e. no *independent research on human [creative] thinking* by you. You have relied entirely on other people’s research and ideas about creativity – just as Opencog relies entirely on existing technology and software. You add your own tweaks here and there. But that is it. And a true AGI-er [I now realise] MUST do his own extended research/introspection into his own thinking. He MUST understand from personal experience/knowledge that *thinking* represents a whole different and higher level of “information management* in counterpoint to algos which are low-level automatic “information processing”. Had you done any extended introspection you would be at least ready to realise this. You haven’t done remotely enough introspection here. Do some more. P.S. You may remember I gave you a beautiful opportunity to introspect about quasi-mathematical thinking some years ago - - “look at how I [or you] draw a doodle” [as recorded step-by-step on the GE IMagination Cubed site] – “how can that be algorithmic [or computationally] determined?” - you declined that introspective opportunity. You always do. From: Ben Goertzel Sent: Friday, April 12, 2013 6:47 AM To: AGI Subject: Re: [agi] Steps of Thought Will Follow the Discovery of Forms-of-Thought On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 4:33 AM, Mike Tintner <[email protected]> wrote: Have you ever thought of doing your own personal research? Recreating a minute of your own thoughts about a given problem? Looking at the subject directly rather than through others’ eyes? I’m interested because the idea doesn’t seem to have occurred to you (or Ben).- and of course it’s essential if you really want to explore how the conscious mind works. Personally I have spent plenty of time introspecting into my own thought process and trying to understand it, and mapping what I perceive into scientific concepts... I am not sure why you are moved to make this false statement about my own personal thoughts and methodology? I suppose you are convinced that if I introspected ACCURATELY, then I would see that your ideas about my own mind are the correct ones, and my own current and past perceptions of my own mind are wrong? ;-p -- Ben G AGI | Archives | Modify Your Subscription ------------------------------------------- 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
<<wlEmoticon-smile[1].png>>
