Why shouldn't they? JM On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 5:59 PM, Richard Ruquist <[email protected]> wrote:
> John, > > Your model may explain why some drugs improve creativity. > Richard > > On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 4:52 PM, John Mikes <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 09/10/2012, at 8:39 AM, Russell Standish wrote: > > > > > > The problem that exercises me (when I get a chance to exercise it) is > > that of creativity. David Deutsch correctly identifies that this is one > of > > the main impediments to AGI. Yet biological evolution is a creative > > process, one for which epistemology apparently has no role at all. > > > > Continuous, open-ended creativity in evolution is considered the main > > problem in Artificial Life (and perhaps other fields). Solving it may > > be the work of a single moment of inspiration (I wish), but more > > likely it will involve incremental advances in topics such as > > information, complexity, emergence and other such partly philosophical > > topics before we even understand what it means for something to be > > open-ended creative. Popperian epistemology, to the extent it has a > > role, will come much further down the track. > > > > Cheers... > > ------------------------ > > JM: Not that I want to produce such 'single moment of inspiration': > > I gave some thought to the concept of creativity over the past 20 years. > > At this moment I stand (and my stance is likely to undergo further > changes) > > with including Robert Rosen's "anticipation" concept as applied to my own > > world-view (belief!) of agnosticism: there is an infinite complexity we > > cannot know, not even approach and from it we get info-morsels from time > to > > time into OUR world. We are not up to consider those 'morsels' by their > real > > and full nature, only adjusted to our mental capabilities and the so far > > circumscribed 'world' we live in(?). > > This constitutes our 'image' of our "world" - indeed the model of it we > can > > muster in our actual mental inventory (including the application of > > conventional sciences.). > > > > Our curiosity in topics MAY (or may not?) trigger topical info and it is > up > > to us whether we do, or don't pay attention and - maybe - consider them > as > > worthwhile pursuing - which is the way I figure "anticipation". > > If we relate to such anticipation with a positive feedback, we may fail, > or > > succeed, the latter callable the 'creative approach". > > It goes beyond our 'model', beyond what we could feed into our computers, > > beyond the inventory (status quo ante?) of what we already knew (I say: > > yesterday). > > No consequences drawn. > > John M > > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "Everything List" group. > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > [email protected]. > > 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 protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > 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 protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
