[Bo] ...I just wonder how intelligence EVER emerged as the criterion of intellect, at least I have harped on the intelligence/intellect fallacy for years. IMO intelligence is no level in the MOQ, but a biological pattern that reached a peak with the big-brained primate called Homo Sapiens. This pattern the social and intellectual level - in turn - exploited for own purpose (as is all levels' wont).
[Krimel] Again with levels exploiting and being exploited. Really what sense does that make? Intellect to the extent that it is measured on tests seems to reflect speed of access to short term memory. STM is what is held instant to instant in immediate awareness. In this sense intelligence is the ability to quickly insert new ideas and seek out new and novel patterns of concepts. Krimel: > The chief argument against machines being humanlike in the face of > this, would be that they do not have human emotional responses. Since > emotional responses are the products of evolution on a vast time scale > and are functions that preserve the lives of organic beings it is > questionable how valuable they might be to a machine intelligence. [Bo] Good point Krimel. Intellect (as SOM) can't make sense of AI, its criterion for intelligence is for computers to wake up "to consciousness" and think or say "Hey, I am a computer". And further realize that they have been shamelessly abused by humans, FEEL great anger and "take control". This will not happen because computers are just one biological pattern copied, they don't have the other means to rise to the social level - the level of emotions - and absolutely not to the intellectual level (which isn't = consciousness but the level where consciousness is seen as awareness of Reality) It sounds mysterious, but is very simple. [Krimel] Above you are talking about self awareness. I really don't know how self awareness fits into intellect or how they are related in the least. Consciousness is a dubious concept at best. James thought it looked better as a function than as a thing. Crick and Coch have proposed the notion of using the neurosciences to seek out neurological correlated of consciousness. They think we can identify neural structures that perform the various functions of consciousness. Still if, as you say "computers are just one biological pattern copied," this should not detract in the least from computers having whatever it is; since the MoQ holds that everything is "Patterns" of SQ it should not matter how those patterns are represented. Aside from that, emotions do not arise out of consciousness. Quite the opposite, consciousness (whatever it is) arises out of emotions which are far more ancient on the evolutionary scale. It seems that the "function" of consciousness is to check the emotions. It acts mainly as a way of refining the evolutionary heuristics of emotion by assisting us in seeing specifically where those heuristics are likely to fail. Steven mentioned Benjamin Libit awhile back. Libet's work really illustrates this point beautifully. He shows that awareness of "conscious intent" follows activation of the motor cortex prior to the act of moving. Conscious awareness does not signal that a movement will be made. It seems mainly to function to inhibit a decision that has been made non-consciously. James insisted that emotions are purely biological functions over which we have no control and which arise directly from our "perception" of events in the environment. Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
