I believe that a (moderate) coherentist approach makes sense. You can
use logic, correlation, abstraction, synthesis, generalization,
specification, probability and conjecture across the conceptual
objects of the system. But when some objects of interest are found to
be related, I think there should be an attempt to find out why or how
they are related.  I feel that mere association or correlation is not
enough to act as  a basis for AGI. The program has to search for
reason-based reasoning as well. If a reason can't be found or the
observations do not stand out then association or correlation is
adequate, but the idea that association or correlation is substantial
as a basis for knowledge just does not seem right to me.
Jim Bromer


-------------------------------------------
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

Reply via email to