From: Randall Randall (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sun Aug 15 2004 - 08:30:23 MDT
On Aug 13, 2004, at 1:54 PM, Simon Gordon wrote:
> This topic
> has profound implications for AI. I am basically
> saying that human intelligence is not necessarily
> reducible to math, and even if it was, that would be
> irrelevant to the functioning of the intelligence
> anyway. If we want to replicate human intelligence in
> a machine from the ground-up, the "all is math"
> mentality needs to change.
But machines are math. :)
I actually agree with you that it isn't clear that
our universe *is* math, as opposed to the idea that
it happens to be well described at ranges outside
historical human experience by maths humans invented
within those ranges. This is interesting, but not
sufficient to draw the conclusion that math is really
all there is.
However, any AI we build is going to be built on a
computer which really does function by math, so there's
no need to imagine a *lower* level for AI. Instead,
literature is a special case of some math, as J. Rogers
-- Randall Randall <email@example.com> Property law should use #'EQ , not #'EQUAL .
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:48 MDT