Let's don't confuse two statements: (1) To be able to use a natural language (so as to passing Turing Test) is not a necessary condition for a system to be intelligent.
(2) A true AGI should have the potential to learn any natural language (though not necessarily to the level of native speakers). I agree with both of them, and I don't think they contradict to each other. Pei On 10/31/06, Richard Loosemore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
John Scanlon wrote: > One of the major obstacles to real AI is the belief that knowledge of a > natural language is necessary for intelligence. A human-level > intelligent system should be expected to have the ability to learn a > natural language, but it is not necessary. It is better to start with a > formal language, with unambiguous formal syntax, as the primary > interface between human beings and AI systems. This type of language > could be called a "para-natural formal language." It eliminates all of > the syntactical ambiguity that makes competent use of a natural language > so difficult to implement in an AI system. Such a language would also > be a member of the class "fifth generation computer language." Not true. If it is too dumb to acquire a natural language then it is too dumb, period. Richard Loosemore. ----- This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to: http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----- This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to: http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
