On Saturday, February 9, 2013 9:07:50 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote:
>  On 2/9/2013 5:13 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: 
>> It's how I recognize intelligence - and so do you.
> No, I recognize intelligence by experiencing learning. If there were an 
> Elvis impersonator who was so good that you could not tell the difference 
> between a film of him performing and one of Elvis performing, would you say 
> that he had become Elvis Presley?
> Learning is only detectable via function.

Experiencing learning is implicitly detected already. 

Think about it this way:

Let's say I'm a politician. I am about to give a press conference and so I 
have a stack of cards which have been pre-prepared for me by six different 
speech writers. They are color coded; red for questions about the military, 
white for the economy, green for the environment, etc.

If I am a complete idiot, assuming that my writers have done their job, I 
can field most if not all of the hot button questions without having known 
much about them at all. I need only know how to read and to be able to 
recognize which colors belong to which category of questions, and which 
questions seem to be about which category.

Note that there is no one intelligent agent which has an understanding of 
all of the categories.

However, if I were not an idiot, I could conceivably *learn* through the 
course of acting out this political charade, a bit of what I find myself 
parroting. If I am very intelligent, I could actually become informed in 
all of these categories and become, myself, a single intelligent agent with 
a polymath understanding - but -

my function need not change.

Nobody in the press will be able to tell whether I am a genius or an idiot 
based upon anything that I say, given that my speech writers have 
effectively predicted the types of questions which can be answered. As a 
politician, I could probably evade any question which isn't covered by my 

So there it is - a thought experiment, which, without getting into too much 
Searlean complication, clearly shows the enormous hole in assuming any sort 
of equivalence between intelligence and function, especially when there is 
both a will and skill to execute a simulation of intelligence.


> Brent

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to