Cari Tutti, seguendo, per quel che posso capire, la discussione che si è accesa a proposito dell'intelligenza della scienza o della scienza dell'intelligenza, mi piace ricordare che il concetto di "caos" dimostra la sua importanza quando guida i ricercatori a creare nuove idee. I sistemi caotici sono creativi. Senza questa creatività la legislazione del nostro intelletto non potrebbe conferire forme (tras-informare) ai dati altrimenti sconnessi dell'esperienza. Le intuizioni empiriche servono a creare la concordanza o connessione tra le leggi del cervello e le leggi della natura che si compenetrano, esaltano e nobilitano reciprocamente. . Saluti augurali e grati. Francesco Rizzo
2015-03-13 1:25 GMT+01:00 joe.bren...@bluewin.ch <joe.bren...@bluewin.ch>: > Dear Colleagues, > > The science fiction writer and philosopher Stanislaw Lem raised a point > about intelligence in the 1960's which is perhaps worth thinking about > today. He wrote that we shall not see the presence of intelligence in outer > space not because it is not there but rather because its behavior defies > our expectations. There is still no evidence for the non-exclusive > existence of human beings in the class of 'intelligent beings'. However, > Lem thought that one cannot be a fully rounded human being unless one > thinks from time to time about a possible, still unknown community of > intelligent beings of which we would be 'allegedly' part. (The allegedly is > Lem's.) > > The point of this idea is relevant to what we wish to 'get out' of this > discussion. It may not only be information that we can somehow exploit for > our own benefit or even, yet, of mankind. It is a necessary component of > our 'being intelligent'. > > Best wishes, > > Joseph > > ----Message d'origine---- > De : z...@bupt.edu.cn > Date : 06/03/2015 - 18:53 (PDT) > À : pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es, fis@listas.unizar.es > Objet : Re: [Fis] THE FRONTIERS OF INTELLIGENCE SCIENCE--Zhao Chuan > > 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> > *收信人:*fis <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 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
