Ben,
I am frankly flabberghasted by your response. I have given concrete example
after example of creative, domain-crossing problems, where obviously there is
no domain or frame that can be applied to solving the problem (as does
Kauffman) - and at no point do you engage with any of them - or have the least
suggestion as to how a logical/mathematical AGI could go about solving them, or
identify a suitable domain..
On the contrary,it is *you* who repeatedly resort to essentially *reference to
authority* arguments - saying "read my book, my paper etc etc" - and what
basically amounts to the tired line "I have the proof, I just don't have the
time to write it in the margin" (Or "it's too complicated for your pretty
little head.") Be honest - when and where have you ever addressed creative
problems? [Just count how many problems I have raised)..
Just as it is obvious that I know next to nothing about programming, it is also
obvious that you have v. little experience of discussing creative
problemsolving - at, I stress, a *metacognitive* level. (And nor, AFAIK, do any
AGI-ers - only partly excepting Minsky).
All this stands in total, stark contrast to any discussion of logical or
mathematical, problems, where you are always delighted to engage in detail, and
v. helpful and constructive - and do not make excuses to cover up your
inexperience.
Mike,
by definition a creative/emergent problem is one where you have to bring
about a given effect by finding radically new kinds of objects that move or
relate in radically new kinds of ways - to produce that effect. By definition,
you *do not know which domain is appropriate to solving the problem,* (what
kinds of objects or moves are relevant), let alone have a set of instructions
to hold your hand every step of the way - and the eventual solution will
involve crossing hitherto unrelated domains.
That, as Kauffman also insists, is an absolute show stopper. Which is why
the show that is AGI cannot not only not go on, but hasn't even started.
This is just an argument by reference to authority ... Stu Kauffman wrote a
book saying X, therefore we're supposed to believe X is true???
He certainly did not convincingly demonstrate in any of his books or papers
that AGI cannot deal with creativity in the same sense that humans can...
These discussions get **so** tiresome... I am soon going to stop
participating in threads of this nature...
ben g
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
