Richard: Mike,
I think you are going to have to be specific about what you mean by
"irrational" because you mostly just say that all the processes that could
possibly exist in computers are rational, and I am wondering what else is
there that "irrational" could possibly mean. I have named many processes
that seem to me to fit the "irrational" definition, but without being too
clear about it you have declared them all to be just rational, so now I
have no idea what you can be meaning by the word.
Richard,
Er, it helps to read my posts. From my penultimate post to you:
"If a system can change its approach and rules of reasoning at literally any
step of
problem-solving, then it is truly "crazy"/ irrational (think of a crazy
path). And it will be capable of producing all the human irrationalities
that I listed previously - like not even defining or answering the problem.
It will by the same token have the capacity to be truly creative, because it
will ipso facto be capable of lateral thinking at any step of
problem-solving. Is your system capable of that? Or anything close? Somehow
I doubt it, or you'd already be claiming the solution to both AGI and
computational creativity."
A rational system follows a set of rules in solving a problem (which can
incl. rules that self-modify according to metarules) ; a creative,
irrational system can change/break/create any and all rules (incl.
metarules) at any point of solving a problem - the ultimate, by
definition, in adaptivity. (Much like you, and indeed all of us, change the
rules of engagement much of the time in our discussions here).
Listen, no need to reply - because you're obviously not really interested.
To me that's ironic, though, because this is absolutely the most central
issue there is in AGI. But no matter.
-----
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/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=73661748-adcbd5
