Cari Tutti, geometria, filosofia, fisica, psicologia ed, io aggiungo, economia si integrano e armonizzano perfettamente. Tutto ciò si verifica se si conosce la corretta elaborazione e trasformazione o tras-informazione dei concetti: in una varietà continua si hanno tre differenti determinazioni possibili: determinazione di posizione o di luogo, determinazioni di grandezza o quantità, e determinazioni metriche o di misura; il metodo delle relazioni o analogie; la connessione delle nostre rappresentazioni corrisponde alla connessione delle cose. Questo e tanto altro discende dal pensiero geniale di Bernhard Riemann. Distinti saluti. Francecso Rizzo.
2015-03-07 14:53 GMT+01:00 Dai Griffiths <dai.griffith...@gmail.com>: > Thanks for sharing these ideas, which, for me, raise a long standing > problem. > > The concept of 'intelligence' emerged as an ascription of a quality to > humans and other animals who are capable of certain capabilities. That is > to say, the starting point was the behaviours, and this led to the > definition of the concept which charactarised those behaviours. This seems > to be what you are describing in your section 1. The Concept of > Intelligence, with the list (a) to (m). > > In section 2, on the other hand, you speak of 'problem solving' as 'the > major embodiment of intelligence'. In this case, 'intelligence' is no > longer a description of behaviours, but rather the entity which makes those > behaviours possible. > > There is nothing wrong with hypothesising that an ascribed quality is in > fact a verifiable entity. We can go and look for evidence that the entity > exists, and that is often how science moves forward. But in the present > case the concept of general intelligence (G), as a causal force rather than > a statistical tool, is open to doubt. If there is a general intelligence > (as opposed to a collection of capabilities) which can be 'embodied' in > problem solving, then a number of difficult problems are raised. Where does > this general intelligence reside? What is it composed of? How is it > deployed in our problem solving and other aspects of our living? > > Our understanding of this is complicated by our experience of day to day > interactions, in which we interact with people as wholes rather than a > collection of individual capabilities. This gives us the intuition that > some people have more of the quality of general intelligence about them > than do others. And in our language it is reasonable to have a word which > refers to that impression which we have, and that is how we use the word > 'intelligence'. But in our scientific endeavours we need to be more > cautious and critical, and aspire to making a distinction between > observable mechanisms and ascribed qualities (not that this is necessarily > easy to achieve in methodological terms). Because of this I am sympathetic > to Steven's request for differentiation of the topics and types of inquiry. > If we do not go down this road then we should recognise the possibility > that we will end up with a theory which is the equivalent of the phlogiston > explanation for combustion. > > My background is in education, not in intelligence research, so I am happy > to be corrected by those with greater expertise! > > Dai > > > > On 07/03/15 03:53, 钟义信 wrote: > > Dear Pedro, > > > Thank you very much for recommending Ms. ZHAO's good topic, intelligence > science, for discussion at FIS platform. I think it very much valuable that > Ms. > ZHAO put forward to us the great challenge of methodology shift. The attached > file expressed some of my understanding on this iuuse that I would like to > share > with FIS friends. > > > Best regards, > > > Yixin ZHONG > > > > ----- 回复邮件 ----- > *发信人:*Pedro C. Marijuan <pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es> > <pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es> > *收信人:*fis <fis@listas.unizar.es> <fis@listas.unizar.es> > *时间:*2015年03月04日 19时58分15秒 > *主题:*Re: [Fis] THE FRONTIERS OF INTELLIGENCE SCIENCE--Zhao Chuan > > > Dear Chuan and FIS colleagues, > > The scientific study of intelligence is quite paradoxical. One is > reminded about the problems of psychology and ethology to create > adequate categories and frameworks about animal and human intelligence. > The approaches started in Artificial Intelligence were quite glamorous > three or four decades ago, but the limitations were crystal clear at the > end of the 80's. It marked the beginning of Artificial Life and quite > many other views at the different frontiers of the theme (complexity > theory, biocybernetics, biocomputing, etc.) Also an enlarged > Information Science was vindicated as the best option to clear the air > (Stonier, Scarrott... and FIS itself too). In that line, Advanced > Artificial Intelligence, as proposed by Yixin Zhong and others, has > represented in my view a bridge to connect with our own works in > information science. That connection between information "processing" > and intelligence is essential. But in our occasional discussions on the > theme we have always been centered in, say, the scientific > quasi-mechanistic perspectives. It was time to enter the humanistic > dimensions and the connection with the arts. Then, this discussion > revolves around the central pillar to fill in the gap between sciences > and humanities, the "two cultures" of CP Snow. > The global human intelligence, when projected to the world, creates > different "disciplinary" realms that are more an historical result that > a true, genuine necessity. We are caught, necessarily given our > limitations, in a perspectivistic game, but we have the capacity to play > and mix the perspectives... multidisciplinarity is today the buzzword, > though perhaps not well addressed and explained yet. So, your > reflections Chao are quite welcome. > > best--Pedro > > -- > ------------------------------------------------- > Pedro C. Marijuán > Grupo de Bioinformación / Bioinformation Group > Instituto Aragonés de Ciencias de la Salud > Centro de Investigación Biomédica de Aragón (CIBA) > Avda. San Juan Bosco, 13, planta X > 50009 Zaragoza, Spain > Tfno. +34 976 71 3526 (& 6818) > pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es > > http://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/ > ------------------------------------------------- > > _______________________________________________ > Fis mailing list > Fis@listas.unizar.es > http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis > > > > _______________________________________________ > Fis mailing > listFis@listas.unizar.eshttp://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis > > > -- > ----------------------------------------- > > Professor David (Dai) Griffiths > > Professor of Educational Cybernetics > Institute for Educational Cybernetics (IEC) > The University of Boltonhttp://www.bolton.ac.uk/IEC > > > _______________________________________________ > Fis mailing list > Fis@listas.unizar.es > http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis > >
_______________________________________________ Fis mailing list Fis@listas.unizar.es http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
