Hi Jonathan:
You wrote:
> Some of you may be interested in the following:
>
> DISCOVER Vol. 22 No. 1 (January 2001)
> Machines That Think
> By Brad Lemley
>
> The full article is at
> http://www.discover.com/jan_01/gthere.html?article=featmachines.html
>
> Here is an extract to give you a taste
> <Quote>
> For most of their existence, computers have been little more than
> complex adding machines, tabulating data and spitting out useful but
> prosaic results. Now, employing a new kind of programming based on
> biological evolution, computers are invading what we thought was among
> the last uniquely human spheres- true, original, even artful creativity.
> "We're not used to computers creatively solving problems," says David
> Goldberg, chairman of the International Society for Genetic and
> Evolutionary Computation. "But it's happening."
>
> The engine behind the revolution is called evolutionary computation. Its
> basic premise is that the most capable and efficient things on the
> planet came into being through evolution- not as the brainchild of an
> individual designer. After all, the human hand makes the most dexterous
> robotic claw look like nothing more than a pair of rusty pliers.
> </quote>
Thanks for the reference to the Discover article on evolutionary
computing. Fascinating stuff. Discover magazine is my favorite entree
into the science world. Recently there was an article about a physicist
who argues that time, like space, is illusory. Every issue has at least
one article of interest to lay persons.
A couple of observations about evolutionary computation. First,
according to the article it requires “A so-called fitness function (that)
evaluates the progeny . . .” which might be also called a “moral
function” as it represents a value choice. Second, the artist using the
program to produce pictures makes his value choices based on an
aesthetic sense, a uniquely human sense that I think is involved in
many software design and other logical/scientific decisions. Finally, the
article implicitly raises the hoary question about who or what designed
the original evolutionary process. We don’t want to stumble into the
paradox of believing we’ve designed a computer model that shows the
world is not designed.
The more I try to the less I can see an escape from values. Perhaps
you feel the same universality of morality in your work (if you accept
morality as broadly defined in the MOQ). At least I gather you haven’t
completely rejected Pirsig’s views as several other science-oriented
contributors have.
Best, Platt
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:00:58 BST