Difference between revisions of "Talk:The Origin of Thought"

From benscondo.wiki-rpg.com
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 12: Line 12:
  
 
--[[User:Edmiao|Edmiao]] 13:56, 23 April 2007 (MST) May I ask, from where does this interest in artificial intelligence arise?
 
--[[User:Edmiao|Edmiao]] 13:56, 23 April 2007 (MST) May I ask, from where does this interest in artificial intelligence arise?
 +
 +
--[[User:Jason|Jason]] 14:07, 23 April 2007 (MST)Its a combination of two things.  I took a philosophy of artificial intelligence seminar in college and it was my favorite class ever.  It really got me interested in philosophy, and that interest has only grown over time.  The whole thing really came together about 2 years ago when I had this breakthrough thought about how I believe humor is created inside of us and why we like it.  So when I spend time thinking about it, I might as well see if I can coalesce it into something tangible.  Maybe that guy with the question marks on his suit can get me a government grant to write a book about it.  hehe

Revision as of 16:07, 23 April 2007

--Edmiao 22:01, 22 April 2007 (MST) um. huh? manamana. de dee be dee de. manamana. dep deede deep. manamana!

I would define intelligence as creativity. I think someday you could make a computer that could have so much programming as to be able to respond to any input appropriately and appear to hold a conversation, but it would lack creativity. It could not imagine something new and bring that idea/thing to reality. manamana! do doo de do do. manamana. do doo do do. manamana! do do de do do de doo do doodle oo do doo de do.

--Jason 13:46, 23 April 2007 (MST)I think you have hit on an important distinction here. I am not convinced that creativity is intelligence, but I certainly think its an integral part of intellect. Its one reason why I am not sold on much of Jared Diamond; his contention that primitive peoples are (or could be) more intelligent as a whole than more advanced societies strikes me as clearly untrue because they lack what I consider to be the most important piece of cultural intelligence: innovation. If they had it, they wouldnt be primitave anymore!

But with the Turing test, it doesnt really hint at creativity at all. How can we abstract creativity? Really, in many ways it is reproducable. It will be tied in with the tags as I have mentioned previously. Its a main core of my thesis, just like humor. These things arise because of an ability to reference entries marked with certain tags, and then to create a reference in a way that is not standard.

For example, we find something to be interesting or creative (according to my theory) when it is presented as long as our mind sees the product and recognizes its equivalence to a tag previously generated, then the reference is recognized. Items are most profound when we agree with the generated reference yet it was not a reference we ourselves created. Its almost like a subconscious 'Oh, I hadnt considered that, but its totally true' reaction inside yourself.

I know this isnt perfectly formulated yet, but Im hoping to get it more concrete, which is why I made this page. I appreciate hearing your comments. They help me to think about these things more deeply.

--Edmiao 13:56, 23 April 2007 (MST) May I ask, from where does this interest in artificial intelligence arise?

--Jason 14:07, 23 April 2007 (MST)Its a combination of two things. I took a philosophy of artificial intelligence seminar in college and it was my favorite class ever. It really got me interested in philosophy, and that interest has only grown over time. The whole thing really came together about 2 years ago when I had this breakthrough thought about how I believe humor is created inside of us and why we like it. So when I spend time thinking about it, I might as well see if I can coalesce it into something tangible. Maybe that guy with the question marks on his suit can get me a government grant to write a book about it. hehe