Hi Magnus, my 3/4 distinction was in the earlier mail ... here wherever I said 3, I probably should have said 3/4.
3 and 4 are both about "thinking" - just that in 3 thoughts / ideas / concepts are framed (and if necessary enforced in action) by tradition and authority - they are still thought, manipulated and communicated - whereas 4 is more about "free" thinking, using all reasoning power available, not just those handed down by tradition or authority. (The reason I'm not satisfied with that as a complete definition, is that so much of our thinking process - even intellectual ones - are really based on traditional "received wisdom" of what is intellectual / rational - I simply see many 3/4 patterns, but no really clear 3/4 distinction. But I no longer worry about this, since we seem to have conlcuded that the levels are really just a historical / pragnatic perspective anyway - rather than some fundamental way it had to be.) But, I don't think there is any mystery about how level 3/4 ideas are supported by levels 1/2 - that really was my point. That's true whether I believe level 1 can support 3/4 with or without level 2. And its true whether I can distinguish level 3 from 4 or not. Ian On 3/30/08, Magnus Berg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Ian > > Ian: > > What a (biological) brain "is" (excluding it's mind / thoughts) is a > > level 1 & 2 pattern. > > Ie it's alive, it's made of meat and chemicals, and those are a > > physical pattern, but the things it's made of replace / heal > > themselves and reproduce themselves, hence alive. > > > > It is seems conceivable for a physical (level 1) non-biological brain > > to exist. The question is that in order it to be complex and robust > > enough, it "might" also need to be alive first. ie I'm frankly not > > sure if strong-AI can exist without artificial (non-bio) life first. > > > > So good question Magnus - a for a physical machine (level 1) to be a > > thinking (level 3) brain, it may also have to exhibit level 2 patterns > > first. > > Ok, fair enough. (Although I still think you really need to work on your > level 3/4 distinction. You haven't thought about that lately?) > > However, this raises the question: > > What in level 2 makes the thinking possible? You mention "artificial > (non-bio) life", but what *is* that? Would it be self-healing and > self-reproducing machines? But then what? What would self-healing and > self-reproducing machines have that other machines don't? > > > > (I was really responding to the weaker-AI ideas where people > > see calculators, memory devices and computers as a kind of > > non-thinking "brain" - an oxymoron.) > > Ok, I see. Yes, that's a different beast. However, if we claim that they > can support level 4 ideas, we must show how such simple devices can do > that. I.e. how those level 4 ideas are supported by lower levels. > > Magnus > > 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/ > 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/
