I was reading an article a few months ago from my philosophy news feed that talked about using god as the fallback explanation if you don't have an explanation for whatever ready to go! In other words, lacking a proper cause, the default is god. It seems like "I don't know what the cause is" would be better, though. So, agnostic. Mike A
On 1/22/15, Piaget Modeler via AGI <[email protected]> wrote: > For an AGI system, would "God" be an efficient placeholder for the "unknown > cause" of an event or situation? It seems that this is what some people do > when faced with inexplicable situations that their mental model is not > sufficient to generate an otherwise plausible hypothesis? And would this be > a slippery slope? > On the other hand, police detectives, when investigating a murder seem to > have some model of human action and causes of death. I don't think they put > "God" as a placeholder for the cause of a death in a particular case. > When teaching an AGI, will the world we explain to the AGI be full of > unknowns or knowns? > Thoughts? > ~PM > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------- > 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
