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 everything-list@googlegroups.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.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.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.

Reply via email to