Richard:For my own system (and for Hofstadter too), the natural extension of
the
system to a full AGI design would involve
a system [that] can change its approach and rules of reasoning at
literally any step of problem-solving .... 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.
This is very VERY much part of the design.
There is not any problem with doing all of this.
Does this clarify the question?
I think really I would reflect the question back at you and ask why you
would think that this is a difficult thing to do?
Richard,
Fine. Sounds interesting. But you don't actually clarify or explain
anything. Why don't you explain how you or anyone else can fundamentally
change your approach/rules at any point of solving a problem?
Why don't you, just in plain English, - in philosophical as opposed to
programming form - set out the key rules or principles that allow you or
anyone else to do this? I have never seen such key rules or principles
anywhere, nor indeed even adumbrated anywhere. (Fancy word, but it just came
to mind). And since they are surely a central problem for AGI - and no one
has solved AGI - how on earth could I not think this a difficult matter?
I have some v. rough ideas about this, which I can gladly set out. But I'd
like to hear yours - you should be able to do it briefly. But please, no
handwaving.
-----
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=73792444-8e01d6
