I think I got the gist of what you are saying here... It looks interesting; maybe just a couple of comments.
I am inclined to think that it depends upon perspective as far as if we consider some component narrow- vs strong-AI. I think the distinction is helpful, but not necessarily at some level such as function vs. subfunction vs. program vs. entire system etc. It strikes me that it is the behavior of the program, software, entity, as a *whole* that is in the determining factor of narrow- vs strong-. It is hard to imagine as subroutine that has some specific task as being general. Perhaps I missed the point above (?). The distinguishing characteristic of narrow-ai seems to be that it 1) has nothing like a common sense understanding of human consensus reality and 2) can only function in a well described domain and often gets tangled up on cases which veer to far from the domain. If it isn't that, it's strong/general AI (ie., we don't have it ;) The German philosophers that I've studied distinguish sharply between judgement and understanding. This is a good distrinction. The hallmark of a judgement is that it could be other than what it is. Understanding we've talked about on this list a lot. They both happen at once, of course.... conceptual typing... can you point to a thread where you explain? Mike On 8/12/13, Jim Bromer <[email protected]> wrote: > My idea of judgment does rely on reason based reasoning. This > definition would seem to favor explicit representation. However, I do > recognize that we make some decisions that are not based on explicit > reasons so I do include implicit or hidden reasons in my definition of > judgment. And the fact that we can use poor judgment or poor reasons > for making a decision does seem to weaken the theory. But by making > AGI learning partially dependent on previous judgment-mediated > learning, the idea does hold together even if it cannot be pinned down > to an absolute computational definition. > > How does this idea of judgment-mediated-learning tie into a definition > of an AGI function that can be differentiated from a Narrow AI > function? My idea of conceptual typing, dynamic creative and rational > creative functions and trial and error methods can be combined to > explain how novel conceptual typing might be developed as the program > is running. So that means that I have an explicit way of dynamically > developing new ways of looking at the data as the program is running. > In most contemporary AGI models this is not detailed. So, artificial > judgment can examine the presumptions behind the conceptual structures > that are running as well as develop results that are dependent on > them. - Jim Bromer > > > ------------------------------------------- > 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/303/21088071-f452e424 Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21088071&id_secret=21088071-58d57657 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
