Hi Ben, If Richard Loosemore is half-right, how is he half-wrong?
Terren --- On Mon, 9/29/08, Ben Goertzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: From: Ben Goertzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [agi] Dangerous Knowledge To: [email protected] Date: Monday, September 29, 2008, 6:50 PM I mean that a more productive approach would be to try to understand why the problem is so hard. IMO Richard Loosemore is half-right ... the reason AGI is so hard has to do with Santa Fe Institute style complexity ... Intelligence is not fundamentally grounded in any particular mechanism but rather in emergent structures and dynamics that arise in certain complex systems coupled with their environments ... Characterizing what these emergent structures/dynamics are is hard, and then figuring out how to make these structures/dynamics emerge from computationally feasible knowledge representation and creation structures/ dynamics is hard ... It's hard for much the reason that systems biology is hard: it rubs against the grain of the reductionist approach to science that has become prevalent ... and there's insufficient data to do it fully rigorously so you gotta cleverly and intuitively fill in some big gaps ... (until a few decades from now, when better bio data may provide a lot more info for cog sci, AGI and systems biology... -- Ben agi | Archives | Modify Your Subscription ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=114414975-3c8e69 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
