Yes for me "This is all numbers" so as to be able to model everything and operate upon with computers. But really everything is numbers physically IMO also. A number is a virtual representation or even the thing itself as a thing is a representation except if it is the only thing with no observer but then in that single item panpsychistic universe the thing of unity would represent itself to itself as its own virtuality of unity perhaps...?
0=∞ is dazzlying precise yet imprecise, it connects the two. It blends opposites causing the observer to change mechanics or refactor it's worldview to conceptually propagate and absorb. It wrap-morphs illusion of reality into something representationally more directed... IMO. People can only change their rules somewhat. Humans are a multi-agent intelligence, a single human grown in isolation in a lab would never reach much intelligence it would die. The species traditionally has relied on "agents" expiring when rules severely change as intelligence progresses through time. One of the reasons for limited lifetimes maybe... that biological minds can't fully rewire and expunge? John > -----Original Message----- > From: Mike Archbold [mailto:[email protected]] > > I think "0 = infinity" is a legitimate thought in the way that it is kind of > a look at > all quantity in a sort of atomic way. If you just had a thought "This is all > numbers." I think dogmatist oriented philosophers change the "rules" all the > time by showing the "truth" > which is usually some inner, subconscious drive unknown to everybody but > Nietzsche if I read him correctly! The question seems to be what variation of > philosophic system might be implementable, which I think is what you are > saying. > > On 8/9/13, John Rose <[email protected]> wrote: > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Mike Archbold [mailto:[email protected]] > >> > >> > >> The problems start in strong AI, however, when you try to reconcile > >> things like "beginning, cause, one vs. many, > >> sameness/difference/likeness, complete vs. > >> incomplete, possible, > >> potential..." etc etc etc. Just considering one of these is fine, > >> one can usually make sense out of it, but the problem is that all > >> these concepts are concurrently taken up in something in the world. > >> How do you even begin to work all of that together? If the approach > >> is emergence, nobody does, they just place hope in a clever learning > >> scheme can determine those things. It might work -- I'm not knocking > >> evolutionary learning algorithms. It might not though, and then it's > >> back to head scratching on these long standing philosophy issues, > >> like the potential vs actual, appearance in relation to existence... > >> on and on like that. > >> > > > > I know. All these fuzzy concepts from the philosophers, Kant is like > > that I just can't read Kant. Picture loading them all in a knowledge > > graph. What is "essence" across the various philosophies through time > > until now and how does that relate to "being". They should just load > > up into the system aren't all these things just subgraphs with relative and > changing definitions? > > > > What we can do with AGI but the philosophers cannot is change the > > rules from the ground up. Modify logic to see what happens. What if > > "up" really is "down" or outside is really inside? How does the system > > refactor > itself? > > Some AGI's couldn't deal with that though they might have to re-emerge > > what the "essence of being" is. The AGI system really needs to be able > > to do that. The shining light of rationalism has to de-rationalize > > itself locally in various ways in order to see into the shadows of > > unknown so it can ingest new rules, those of which were previously > > illogical... and some new rules might require total system > > refactoring. Human brains struggle with total system refactoring. A 0=∞ > conjecture is deflected rather than subsumed. > > There is too much logic against it. A full integration would yield > > unacceptable systemic risk. > > > > John > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------- > > AGI > > Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now > > RSS Feed: > > https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/11943661-d9279dae > > Modify Your Subscription: > > https://www.listbox.com/member/?&; > > 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/303/248029-3b178a58 > Modify Your Subscription: > https://www.listbox.com/member/?&; > 85ca2aa2 > 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/303/21088071-f452e424 Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21088071&id_secret=21088071-58d57657 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
