I would define a situation as: a particular network of interrelated properties, which tend to collectively apply to __sets of entities that are somewhat clustered together in time and possibly space as well__....
A situation can be used as a context for reasoning, but can also be considered as an object of reasoning in itself... Contextualizing semantics and reasoning relative to situations has a long history, see "situation semantics" from the 1980s or whenever.... Though the situation semanticists construed the notion of "situation" quite broadly. -- Ben G On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 12:26 PM, Aaron Hosford via AGI <[email protected]>wrote: > There is no difference in *what* can be treated as an object or a > situation, but they are different *treatments *of those things. Treating > something as an object is a holistic perspective, while treating it as a > situation is a reductionist perspective. Each has its own advantages and > disadvantages, depending on what you are attempting to accomplish. It would > probably be ideal if a system could look at things automatically as > objects, and then "zoom in" as needed, converting them to situations. This > would lend a sort of fractal structure to problem solving, allowing > relationships and interactions to be inspected at the most appropriate > level of detail. > > > > On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 5:30 AM, Jim Bromer via AGI <[email protected]>wrote: > >> There is no difference between an object and a situation, because a >> situation can be treated as an 'object' (of thought or otherwise be treated >> as object-like. And of course situations occur inside of situations. That >> is true even in traditional uses of the terms. >> >> Jim Bromer >> >> >> On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 8:25 PM, Piaget Modeler via AGI >> <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> Can one have situations inside situations? >>> >>> What's the difference between an object and a situation? >>> >>> Kindly advise. >>> >>> ~PM >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2014 16:50:24 -0600 >>> From: [email protected] >>> To: [email protected] >>> Subject: Re: [agi] Situations >>> >>> >>> Greetings Telmo, >>> I've responded to your comments below. >>> Are you working on an ontology based AGI approach? >>> >>> Stan >>> >>> On 04/28/2014 02:30 PM, Telmo Menezes via AGI wrote: >>> >>> Hi Stanley, >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 9:23 PM, Stanley Nilsen via AGI <[email protected] >>> > wrote: >>> >>> Hi PM, >>> >>> A few thoughts - >>> >>> One might try to come up with methods to generalize situations - put in >>> categories and sub categories and sub sub categories... This sounds >>> logical, but also terribly tedious. >>> >>> My alternative is to look at the world as sets of triggers. A trigger >>> initiates an action - maybe to assert a new fact. The new fact might then >>> trigger something else... >>> >>> >>> Ok, but I don't see how this removes the need for an ontology. >>> >>> As I understand it, there are several efforts to create massive >>> ontology. And, we can all see the "value" of it. The struggle is in >>> finding the mechanisms that can cash in on that value - the magic sauce? >>> >>> I focus on how to become more intelligent when you start at next to >>> nothing. What's the bootstrap look like? At what point does a computer >>> begin to build it's intelligence? And, what do the construction elements >>> resemble? >>> >>> It could be implicit or explicit, but you still have to be able to >>> make more and more distinctions between triggers or actions. I tell the AI >>> to book me a trip to Cambridge. What Cambridge, UK or USA? And then, to >>> book the ticket I have to know that Cambridge is a town, and that I already >>> know something about how to book travels into towns, and so on. >>> >>> >>> Software "assistants" are pretty popular now. I understand Microsoft is >>> planning one to compete with Siri. Maybe this is the way to the future. >>> Start out assisting and one day take over :) >>> >>> >>> You need some way to generalise, and this leads to some hierarchy of >>> types. I bet our brain encodes a huge one. But how does it encode it? >>> >>> >>> >>> What is triggered depends on what our "understanding" makes of >>> triggers. Pretty much a Rube Goldberg contraption, but gets interesting >>> quickly. Understanding isn't that vague, it's whatever can be coded into >>> rules. >>> >>> >>> So you would say that a thermostat understands temperature? >>> >>> No, I would say that whatever is reading and setting the thermostat >>> needs to understand the effect they want to achieve. The "user" chooses >>> the thermostat based on understanding of outcomes that are expected. >>> >>> The thermostat is simply a "see" mechanism - it triggers something >>> else. If you wrote a rule to act like a thermostat, I would say that the >>> rule understands an aspect of a thermostat - e.g. numbers change over time >>> and there is a trigger point. I don't think the rule needs to know about >>> atomic vibrations, or the cost of a barrel of oil. >>> >>> I'm not downplaying ontology, it will be useful. I just don't put it as >>> first priority in building an AGI. >>> >>> Stan >>> >>> >>> *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> >>> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/19999924-4a978ccc> | >>> 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/303/24379807-f5817f28> | >>> 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/303/23050605-2da819ff> | >> 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/303/212726-deec6279> | > Modify<https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;>Your Subscription > <http://www.listbox.com> > -- Ben Goertzel, PhD http://goertzel.org "In an insane world, the sane man must appear to be insane". -- Capt. James T. Kirk "Emancipate yourself from mental slavery / None but ourselves can free our minds" -- Robert Nesta Marley ------------------------------------------- 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
