Mark Waser Wrote: <<
I'm just finishing off a paper for the AAAI Fall BICA Symposium where I
effectively argue that religious belief is a rational drive common to all
goal-seeking entities. I don't (by any means) hit people in the face with
that exact statement but it's plainly evident from what I do write. Far too
many people have been tainted/turned-off by the irrational over-believers
and now instinctively throw the baby out with the bathwater whenever
religion comes up (Richard Dawkins, I'm looking at you :-). People need to
look at what some of the more rational religious leaders are saying (the
Dalai Lama being an *excellent* case in point with his hard-core support for
the scientific investigation of meditation and other subjects).
>>
I agree, but, in general, it is usually wiser to praise or criticize
the comment rather than the person.  (I have learned that the hard way
through repeated errors.)  Your reason for supporting the Dali Lama is
an example of this.

MW Wrote: <<
What do you perceive as the difference/distinction between scientific
rationalism and simple rationalism? I don't perceive them as being
different at all.
>>
I want to write more about this, but to make it simple I would say
that rational thought can be seen as being tied to logic or a logical
based system of reference.  The logic that I am thinking of would not
be intended to be used to create a perfect model of the subject of the
thought, but as a logic-based model of the conjectures about the
subject of the thought.  This view can be incorporated into AGI.
However, this view of rationalism is problematic, because we usually
need to associate a logical position with a referent that will be
represented by a range of fluctuating combinations of data events in
the data environment.  Surprisingly this is even true when the data
environment is only comprised of man made symbols like words.  So
then, scientific rationalism would be a methodical means of looking
for confirmatory and disconfirmatory evidence supporting some rational
view.  Of course, this requires more than rational thought, because it
would need to explore alternatives through the use of imagination.
Jim Bromer

-------------------------------------------
agi
Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now
RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/
Modify Your Subscription: 
http://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=101455710-f059c4
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com

Reply via email to