Bob,
My point isn't obviously getting through - and it would take a long argument
to make it properly. But, in essence, it's this: geometry and maths, by
definition, along with other rational sign systems, can only tell you what
the bodies and shapes of this world have in COMMON . They deal only in
generalities and GENERAL shapes and quantities. They can't tell or show you
what makes each separate body DIFFERENT and INDIVIDUAL. But your
imagination - i.e. all the image processing of your brain, which accounts,
for more of your brain than the generalising parts - can tell and reflect,
and is exquisitely sensitive to, those differences - and has to be in order
to survive, You have to be able to tell what makes Russell W different from
Vlad N from Bob M not just what they have in common, and those differences
canot be analysed *formulaically.*
All the current analysis of image processing, aka Hawkins & co, studies only
how the brain hierarchically processes the INVARIANT properties of images.
But obviously, if you think about it, the brain is also massively skilled
at, and engaged simultaneously in, recognizing the VARIANT properties too .
What makes every body in this world different is that it is to some extent,
IRREGULAR - "CRAZY." Look at those faces again - what stamps them as
different is their irregularities, the slightly off jawlines, imbalanced
eyebrows, twisted smile and the irregular combination of all those features.
And your brain is so sensitive to those differences - if you saw a human
face that was perfectly regular, you'd be upset. We crave the "individual
touch" as well as the symmetrical.
Geometry can only analyse real world shapes in terms of certain basic
REGULAR and artificial shapes - like squares, triangles, and regular lines
etc..
But in so doing, geometry along with other rational systems always has to
SMOOTH OVER the IRREGULARITIES of real bodies. They always adjust the data
to make them fit those regular geometrical/mathematical units of analysis.
And they always acknowledge, locally, that they do so (hence Russell &
Einstein's remarks). But globally, many rationalists - especially AI-ers -
completely forget this. They, in effect, think the world actually is
regular - full of perfect circles and patterns etc - they think that
geometry provides a vocabulary of shapes adequate to deal with the real,
crazy world.
Actually there is a vast and much larger world of IRREGULAR shapes, abstract
as well as real, that geometry has never heard of, and is forbidden from
dealing with - which you will find especially in the abstract arts
(in case you need reminding:
http://search.live.com/images/results.aspx?q=abstract+art&go=&form=QBLH&scope=images
- like the "squarishes" of Rothko, and "rectangular-y's-sort-of" and
circularishes and not just formulaic, if sophisticated random walks aka
geometry, but truly crazy doodles aka Mike Tintner and blobby blots a la
Jackson Pollock. The abstract arts reflect real world shapes much more
accurately than geometry.
Rational systems exist to find regularity in irregularity, pattern in mess,
order in disorder - and they do so by abstracting and generalising.
But images and imagination are able to reflect the concrete reality without
abstracting (or with much less) - the irregularities of faces, the messiness
of rooms, the disorder of events that defeats and always will defeat any
attempt at comprehensive analysis.
Roughly half your brain is there to generalise and rationalise about the
regularities of the world. But at least half is there to imaginatively
reflect, and reflect upon, the individual irregularities of things.
That's why rational sciences & technology account for only half of human
culture, and the imaginative arts account for the other half.
All your systems can only really deal with abstract regular general classes.
Imaginative systems deal with concrete irregular individuals. (It's a
necessary DIVISION of labour).
Imaginative systems positively glory in the individual and irregular and
BREAKING the pattern - hence rational John a while ago, missed the whole
point of music.
Most real world problemsolving is about irregular, messy individuals (ask
Steve) - not about regular, neat textbook generalities. And general
intelligence depends on what rational AGI-ers cannot bear to contemplate -
not just reflecting those irregularities, but also inventing irregular,
rule-breaking, solutions to deal with them.
Bob/MT:>> So here's simple evidence - look at the following foto - and note
that you
can distinguish each individual in it immediately. And you can only do it
imagistically. No maths, no language, no algebraic variables, no
programming
languages can tell you what makes each one of those people individual/
different. Just images. So uniquely powerful.
Anyone who proposes that image understanding somehow does not involve
a good deal of geometry/maths hasn't researched the area or done any
computer vision, in my opinion. Even if you ignore artificial systems
and just look at biology it's really all about geometry and massively
parallel nonlinear transformations.
-------------------------------------------
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=106510220-47b225
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
