Dear Ted, and All FIS Freinds,

Many thanks to Pedro who provides the precious way for me to learn from, and 
exchange ideas with, FIS friends for the studies of information science. I 
appreciate very much Miss Chuan Zhao's idea that scientists from east and west 
work together and that scientists and artists work together. 

It is noticed from the discussions that different people may, to some extent, 
have differnt understanding over the concept in discussion. This is yet a very 
normal pattern and it is the differences that make everyone to have more 
rethoughts and thus have deeper understanding.  Consequently, new progresses 
could then be achieved collectively in this way.

It is also nice to notice that the concept of 
"Information-Knowledge-Intelligence Conversion, or Information Conversion in 
brief" has received some attentions from the discussions. To my understanding, 
this conversion is an essential principle, or an important law, in Information 
Science. It may be of more significance than the law of Energy Conversion in 
physics. Upon Pedro's request, I will make more explanations ealier or later in 
coming April. It is my sincere hope that more comments and criticisms can then 
be received from you.

Dear Ted, are you going to be in China for some period of time? If so, please 
let us know.


Best regards,




Y. X. Zhong (钟义信)
Prof., Beijing University of Posts & Telecommunications  
Editor-in-Chief, Journal of Intelligent Systems
Chairman of Editorial Board, Journal of China P&T Universities
Chair of advisory board, International Journal of Advanced Intelligence


yxzh...@ieee.org 

2011-03-12



发件人: Ted Goranson
发送时间: 2011-03-12, 00:08:31
收件人: fis@listas.unizar.es
抄送: 
主题: [Fis] To Zhao, Yi Xin and Joseph

Zhao --

> Are you Chinese?

Almost. My grandchildren are Chinese and I expect to be in China soon and for 
much of my future.

> I agree with your abstract: “…two together reinforce each other in a powerful 
> way. If Yi Xin’s proposal was an information-centric approach to the problem 
> of information and Zhao’s was an intelligence-centric approach to the same 
> problem.”

> ...

>            Where is new? And what is new? Now allow it be is the source of 
> new.
> 
>             Mu xin mentioned an inscription in a centimes in one of his 
> novel, from his Chinese first I 
think is “many into one”, the day before yesterday I asked Prof. Mair, he sent 
back, the Latin and 
English one: “e pluribus unum ”, “out of many, one”, these is the stander.
> 
>             Yes, if now we face a new renaissance and this time the 
> Renaissance is of science and art, 
east and west together!

Let me respond briefly to you by turning the images a bit more toward what the 
FIS group is used to, 
and at the same time respond to Joseph.

I have been working on a framework that can loosely be described as merging art 
and science, 
supposing that we define science as a collection of useful logical statements 
about the world, and art 
as engaging "statements" (about the world) that skate above logic. The goal is 
to create a second 
reasoning system that has some formal basis for this "art" side and which 
integrates in useful ways 
with logic. We readily experience art and love in life. In this category, I 
also include our ability to 
"reason" about the many "soft" things we encounter; these include reasoning 
over situations 
where we do not or cannot have facts.

The result is a two-sorted logic. The second "sort" is not logic in the 
ordinarily understood sense; instead it is a 
categoric calculus where the objects are situations instead of facts and 
inferences and the 
connectives are morphisms (and more sophisticated operations) instead of the 
well-traveled logical connectives. This notion of two-sorts is widely used in 
theorem-proving systems and was developed for "soft" reasoning as situation 
theory. We are now taking 
advantage of new results in categoric mathematics of logic to finally build 
practical reasoning and 
agent systems.

I have always believed that this applies directly to the FIS problem, which I 
see as requiring one set 
of "right hand side" logics which characterize observations "outside" the 
system: biosemiotics, 
information entropic imperative-based systems, and new "native" abstractions. 
The first two of these dominate FIS discussions, 
forming two tribes. I see the first as bringing the abstractions of Peircean 
human cognition to 
biology (and biologically similar self-organizing); the second is instead 
"abstracting up" from physics, leveraging powerful tools of 
thermodynamics, effect and probability. New native abstractions are explored by 
Jerry, Karl and 
John. All three of these have domains in which they are best. None by itself 
will be sufficient. 
They cannot be merged.

So on our right hand side will be these three plus the plain old logical (also 
read: ordinary AI) 
frameworks. On the left will be something new, but not unexpected, since first 
(to my knowledge) 
explicitly being proposed by von Neumann. These cover something like reasoning 
"inside" the 
system; what do molecules "think" when they collaboratively build systemic 
contexts? The question 
here is also not a quest for the one-true-vision-of-god, but a set of functors, 
monads, arrows that support what we know of the left hand side 
phenomenon. It is still science, after all. We've learned quite a bit about 
this so far, especially 
about causal connectives, but have much yet to learn.

So, when such a man as Yi Xin, proposes we add intelligence to our 
considerations of information, 
it made great sense to me. Information fits well on the right hand side, and 
our collected 
FIS experts have the various threads well in hand. FIS expertise is a 
leverageable treasure.

But "intelligence" of the kind we normally associate with humans and autonomic, 
autopoeitic living 
systems is definitely a left hand side, soft, second sort of problem. As my 
colleagues, including 
Beth say, we need to look at art as one doorway into this mystery. I know Beth 
will comment more 
on this after certain near term demands on her time relax.

Again, I thank Yi Xin for the suggested expansion of our scope, and the 
inclusion of art (and story) 
from Zhao.

--Ted



_____
Ted Goranson
tedgoran...@mac.com
http://www.sirius-beta.com






_______________________________________________
fis mailing list
fis@listas.unizar.es
https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
_______________________________________________
fis mailing list
fis@listas.unizar.es
https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis

Reply via email to