Inconsistency, though annoying, is a major driving force for learning
and creativity.

A system that is always consistent will be very boring.

Pei

On 2/5/07, Ben Goertzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


For a different view on probabilistic and logical consistency, we can
always turn to Dostoevsky, who posited that the essence of being
human is that we can make ourselves believe 2+2=5 if we really want
to '-)

I.e., he saw our potential for **willful inconsistency**, considered
in the context of our potential for substantial consistency, as an
essential -- perhaps _the_ essential -- feature of our humanity.

He agreed that humans are not fully consistent, but found this
aesthetically and even morally positive!

I agree with him at least that it can be entertaining...

-- Ben G

-----
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/?list_id=303


-----
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/?list_id=303

Reply via email to