I tend to agree. There is no requirement that intelligence requires 
emotion. Probably the most important requisite to intelligence is a strong 
survival instinct at the species level, and an environment where a high 
level of intelligence is a determining factor in survival. (Whether that 
environment still exists is not necessarily an important question once 
intelligence has developed.)

At 06:23 AM 5/25/2003 -0700, you wrote:


>--- will hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
><snip>
> > If machines become intelligent, they must feel.
> > Without emotion there is no reason to make a choice
> > and a machine that can't make choices is not
> > intelligent.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
><snip>
>
>I see no absolute reason that emotion must be coupled
>to intelligence.  I could, in fact,cite a wealth of
>information that indicates emotion is the perfect
>counter to intelligent decisions.  I doubt "we" could
>ever really communicate in a meaningful way with such
>an intelligence, as our decisions would remain
>subjective, and the other objective.  We could share
>science, math, medicine and a few other things, but
>art, music, sex, and the more subtle arts would be
>left out of the equation.
>
>Cosider a collective.  Ants perform intelligent
>actions, but show little that we could allude to
>passion.  I would almost expect an intelligence we
>meet from without or within "known space" to be an
>advanced version of ants or wasps.  It is a very early
>development in evolution (at least here), and very
>successful.  What are the odds that we meet such an
>entity?  Better than average.  Especially if we create
>it.
>
>What would thier passion be, aside from survival?
>
>The individual parts would be little different than
>machines.  The whole could be inteligent, but would it
>like Rodan, or Santana?  Probably not.  They might see
>in a wavelength that precludes enjoying Monet.  I, at
>least, cannot fathom a collective that "feels."
>
>I could be wrong, God knows I have a couple of
>ex-wives that say I have been wrong before...
>
>Anyway, it seems like a fun topic to kick around.  If
>it annoys the list, let's take it off-line.
>
>=====
>Warmest Regards,
>
>Doug Riddle
>http://www.dougriddle.com
>http://fossile-project.sourceforge.net/
>http://www.libranet.com
>-- "Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are 
>the Peoples' Liberty Teeth." - George Washington --
>
>
>__________________________________
>Do you Yahoo!?
>The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
>http://search.yahoo.com
>
>_______________________________________________
>General mailing list
>[email protected]
>http://brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/general_brlug.net


---
Dustin Puryear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Puryear Information Technology
Windows, UNIX, and IT Consulting
http://www.puryear-it.com


Reply via email to