Ben, Be that as it may, spontaneous insight was just one example of an aspect of human intelligence that's not well understood. I'll give you another one that is more difficult to theorize about - I assume you've heard of the savant Daniel Tammet who is able to do amazing feats of computation and memory? He appears to be doing these things in a way that does not involve algorithmic computation, as vetted by Vilayanur Ramachandran. Tammet is clearly one of the most intelligent people on the planet by many measures, and he does it in ways we don't understand.
This isn't an invitation to theorize about Tammet's cognitive machinery, as interesting as that exercise might be. It's to make the larger point that we may be so immersed in our own conceptualizations of intelligence - particularly because we live in our models and draw on our own experience and introspection to elaborate them - that we may have tunnel vision about the possibilities for better or different models. Or, we may take for granted huge swaths of what makes us so smart, because it's so familiar, or below the radar of our conscious awareness, that it doesn't even occur to us to reflect on it. A perfect example of that is how we acquire language (our first language). Introspection is not available to us there, so all we have is theory. And even when introspection *is* available to us, we may fall prey to the self-deception that is such an integral part of human psychology. In short, claiming that your particular design is capable of AGI is quite a bold claim, because of all the possible pitfalls involved with theorizing about human-level intelligence. Given that the graveyard of AI's history is strewn with the bones of outrageous boasts and predictions, it's too tempting to see Novamente as just the latest in a long lineage. Why do we insist on shooting for the moon, when we still can't even explain the brain of a housefly? One of the best reasons to go with an evolving-design approach is that we're not pretending we're going to get to human-level AI on the first shot. Instead, we gradually build up the complexity of our "creations", building on prior successes and milestones. We see the evolution of intelligence as it becomes progressively more complicated. Instead of leaping off a cliff (like Icarus), we climb a mountain (like Sisyphus ;-). Progress is measurable and reflects the graduated spectrum of intelligence, a nuance that has never been fashionable. Terren --- On Mon, 6/30/08, Ben Goertzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I wrote a book about the emergence of spontaneous creativity > from > underlying complex dynamics. It was published in 1997 with > the title > "From Complexity to Creativity." Some of the > material is dated but I > still believe the basic ideas make sense. Some of the main > ideas were > reviewed in "The Hidden Pattern" (2006). I > don't have time to review > the ideas right now (I'm in an airport during a flight > change doing a > quick email check) but suffice to say that I did put a lot > of thought > and analysis into how spontaneous creativity emerges from > complex > cognitive systems. So have others. It is not a total > mystery, as > mysterious as the experience can seem subjectively. > > -- Ben G > > On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 1:32 PM, Terren Suydam > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Ben, > > > > I agree, an evolved design has limits too, but the key > difference between a contrived design and one that is > allowed to evolve is that the evolved critter's > intelligence is grounded in the context of its own > 'experience', whereas the contrived one's > intelligence is grounded in the experience of its creator, > and subject to the limitations built into that conception > of intelligence. For example, we really have no idea how we > arrive at spontaneous insights (in the shower, for example). > A chess master suddenly sees the game-winning move. We can > be fairly certain that often, these insights are not the > product of logical analysis. So if our conception of > intelligence fails to explain these important aspects, our > designs based on those conceptions will fail to exhibit > them. An evolved intelligence, on the other hand, is not > limited in this way, and has the potential to exhibit > intelligence in ways we're not capable of > comprehending. > > > > [btw, I'm using the scare quotes around the word > experience as it applies to AGI because it's a > controversial word and I hope to convey the basic idea > about experience without getting into technical details > about it. I can get into that, if anyone thinks it > necessary, just didn't want to get bogged down.] > > > > Furthermore, there are deeper epistemological issues > with the difference between design and self-organization > that get into the notion of autonomy as well (i.e., designs > lack autonomy to the degree they are specified), but > I'll save that for when I feel like putting everyone to > sleep :-] > > > > Terren > > > > PS. As an aside, I believe spontaneous insight is > likely to be an example of self-organized criticality, > which is a description of the behavior of earthquakes, > avalanches, and the punctuated equilibrium model of > evolution. Which is to say, a sudden insight is like an > avalanche of mental transformations, triggered by some > minor event but the result of a build-up of dynamic > tension. Self-organized criticality is > > explained by the late Per Bak in _How Nature Works_, a > short, excellent read and an brilliant example of scientific > and mathematical progress in the realm of complexity. > > > > --- On Mon, 6/30/08, Ben Goertzel > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> I agree that all designed systems have > limitations, but I > >> also suggest > >> that all evolved systems have limitations. > >> > >> This is just the "no free lunch theorem" > -- in > >> order to perform better > >> than random search at certain optimization tasks, > a system > >> needs to > >> have some biases built in, and these biases will > cause it > >> to work > >> WORSE than random search on some other > optimization tasks. > >> > >> No AGI based on finite resources will ever be > **truly** > >> general, be it > >> an engineered or evolved systems > >> > >> Evolved systems are far from being beyond running > into dead > >> ends ... > >> their adaptability is far from infinite ... the > >> evolutionary process > >> itself may be endlessly creative, but in that > sense so may > >> be the > >> self-modifying process of an engineered AGI ... > >> > >> -- Ben G > >> > >> On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 3:17 AM, Terren Suydam > >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > > >> > --- On Mon, 6/30/08, Ben Goertzel > >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> >> but I don't agree that predicting > **which** > >> AGI designs can lead > >> >> to the emergent properties corresponding > to > >> general intelligence, > >> >> is pragmatically impossible to do in an > analytical > >> and rational way ... > >> > > >> > OK, I grant you that you may be able to do > that. I > >> believe that we can be extremely clever in this > regard. An > >> example of that is an implementation of a Turing > Machine > >> within the Game of Life: > >> > > >> > http://rendell-attic.org/gol/tm.htm > >> > > >> > What a beautiful construction. But it's > completely > >> contrived. What you're suggesting is > equivalent, because > >> your design is contrived by your own intelligence. > [I > >> understand that within the Novamente idea is room > for > >> non-deterministic (for practical purposes) > behavior, so it > >> doesn't suffer from the usual > complexity-inspired > >> criticisms of purely logical systems.] > >> > > >> > But whatever achievement you make, it's > just one > >> particular design that may prove effective in some > set of > >> domains. And there's the rub - the fact that > your > >> design is at least partially static will limit its > >> applicability in some set of domains. I make this > argument > >> more completely here: > >> > > >> > > >> > http://www.machineslikeus.com/cms/news/design-bad-or-why-artificial-intelligence-needs-artificial-life > >> > or http://tinyurl.com/3coavb > >> > > >> > If you design a robot, you limit its degrees > of > >> freedom. And there will be environments it cannot > get > >> around in. By contrast, if you have a design that > is > >> capable of changing itself (even if that means > from > >> generation to generation), then creative > configurations can > >> be discovered. The same basic idea works in the > mental arena > >> as well. If you specify the mental machinery, > there will be > >> environments it cannot get around in, so to speak. > There > >> will be important ways in which it is unable to > adapt. You > >> are limiting your design by your own intelligence, > which > >> though considerable, is no match for the > creativity > >> manifest in a single biological cell. > >> > > >> > Terren > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > ------------------------------------------- > >> > 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/?&; > >> > Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Ben Goertzel, PhD > >> CEO, Novamente LLC and Biomind LLC > >> Director of Research, SIAI > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > >> "Nothing will ever be attempted if all > possible > >> objections must be > >> first overcome " - Dr Samuel Johnson > >> > >> > >> ------------------------------------------- > >> 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/?&; > >> Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------- > > 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/?&; > > Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com > > > > > > -- > Ben Goertzel, PhD > CEO, Novamente LLC and Biomind LLC > Director of Research, SIAI > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > "Nothing will ever be attempted if all possible > objections must be > first overcome " - Dr Samuel Johnson > > > ------------------------------------------- > 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/?&; > Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com ------------------------------------------- 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
