Hi meekerdb This is not rocket science.
To be aware you must have both subject and object: awareness = subject + object Neither materialism nor science can provide a subject, since a subject must be subjective. So neither one will permit awareness. Start studying the mnonadology. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 8/23/2012 Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so everything could function." ----- Receiving the following content ----- From: meekerdb Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-08-22, 19:15:57 Subject: Re: intuition On 8/22/2012 1:04 PM, John Mikes wrote: Brent Meeker wrote on list: Intuition is when a seemingly true proposition pops into your head and you aren't aware of any preceding thought process leading to it. According to (you?) computers are never aware of anything, so everything they produce is intuition. Brent Dear Brent, to 'your' part: is an urge to find some solution one of your "thought processes"? In speculation you may not realize the train of thoughts leading to whatever is popping up as a solution. It may happen even WITHOUT the urgency I mentioned. Let us say: Just an 'idea' pops up - it may be called intuition. If you are ordered, you may assign it to problems that occupied your mind lately. To 'computers': whenever a computer "produces" a result it is algorithmically based on data IN the hardware/software (you may call it the 'awareness of the computer.) Simply because it is in the hardware/software doesn't mean the computer is aware of it, any more than the fact that a thought is formulated in your brain means you are aware of it. It is the "popping up" that describes the thought's fully formed appearance in consciousness. This requires a certain reflexive capability that we do not bother to include it in the software of most computers because they don't need it. I think evolution has provided us this reflexive capability as a useful adjunct to language and learning. It allows us to succinctly summarize inferences for their future application and to share our reasoning with others. I think we could provide this kind of awareness to robots that need to learn and act autonomously and to also be able to explain their actions. Someday we will probably build Martian rovers with such autonomy. We don't need the rover to explain it's decisions in terms of the binary switching of its CPU, we only need a 'top level' explanation communicated to us or other rovers. So we won't provide a trace of all the CPU states; only a summary that will appear in as the rovers 'intuition'. Of course if the rovers intuition proves to be faulty and it often runs into a ditch; then we will want to have a deeper record and analysis - just as we want to study the brain chemistry and structure of those who go insane. Brent Proper semantics of new (developing?) territories is of paramount importance. You are usually VERY clear on such: would your AI agree to such definition, added: a suiting ID for intuition as well? (I might have a hard time to identify intuition. The closest I may come up to NOW is: we may cut into peripheral 'shaving' into the limits of our knowledge (I call that "creativity") and that may combine into existing questions as callable 'intuition'). JohnM -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to email@example.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.