From: Randall Randall (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Fri Jan 02 2004 - 14:42:50 MST
On Friday, January 2, 2004, at 05:39 AM, Samantha Atkins wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 20:45:24 -0500
> Randall Randall <email@example.com> wrote:
> > Anecdotally, at least,
>> those with very high intelligence are prone to various
>> other mental problems.
> In brains designed within an evolved biological being, yes. So what
> though? Would you argue that only evolved biological beings can be
Not at all.
>> While one can argue that the haphazard design of human
>> brains makes them susceptible to errors at high complexity
>> that generic intelligences need not exhibit, the reverse
>> is also a possibility. That is, it might be that the
>> structures required for anything we'd recognize as a
>> person are necessarily limited in complexity.
> That is not precisely the reverse. What we recognize as a person is a
> very different discussion from what is the limit of our possible
> intelligence which is a very different discusion from what is the
> limit of intelligence universally.
I'm much less interested in intelligence without personhood,
since that seems to equate to raw computing power. Useful,
but not in the same class.
>> Anyway, I have a suspicion (not really well defined in
>> my mind yet) that the universal failure of command
>> economies is telling us something fundamental about
>> complexity in our universe.
> Hmmm, this looks like another off-track bit of analogical cogitation
> to me.
Yep, possibly so! :)
-- Randall Randall firstname.lastname@example.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:43 MDT