From: mark maxwell (laughingpines@yahoo.co.uk)
Date: Sun Sep 04 2005 - 01:02:24 BST
Scott:
Mark M,
Mark 2-9-05:
I would suggest that the total repertoire of symbols
is static while SQ evolves the whole repertoire all
the time. The repertoire includes memories, books, the
Internet, etc.
Scott asked:
Why not call the evolving of the symbolic repertoire
intellect?
Mark 3-9-03:
Because it is static.
Scott:
I see. Because Pirsig has decreed that intellect is
static, the word 'intellect' cannot be used to
describe the creation of intellectual patterns. Seems
a bit high-handed to me, but I guess Pirsig has
spoken, and that settles it.
Mark 4-9-05:
There is no evidence, to my knowledge, that anyone,
let alone Robert Pirsig, has suggested the Intellect
is static.
Please get a grip of yourself Scott.
What HAS been suggested is that the Intellect employ
es a contemporary repertoire of static symbols - and
that repertoire is evolving.
Scott said:
Don't we say Einstein employed intellect to come up
with his theories, that we employ intellect to write
these posts? Otherwise, we might as well deny all
freedom and responsibility to human beings.
Mark 3-9-03:
I would say Einstein's intellect utilised his
contemporary repertoire.
Scott:
But he didn't add to the repertoire?
Mark 4-9-05:
SQ added to the repertoire via Einstein's
configuration as i see it.
Scott said:
Algorithms within AI are mechanical (like all
algorithms), and as such are the diametric opposite of
intellectual activity.
Mark 2-9-05:
Algorithms manipulate symbols.
Scott:
No. People manipulate some symbols with the help of
algorithms.
Mark 4-9-05:
You see, i find it hard to discriminate between people
and the rest of reality. To me, it is a continuum.
Mark 2-9-05:
One thing is clear: Computers manipulate symbolic
representations.
Scott:
A symbol consists of both a represented and a
representation.
Mark 4-9-05:
The meaning of a symbol is open.
What you consider the meaning of a symbol to be may
not be what another culture means it to be. "Another
culture" includes AI.
Scott:
With a computer we can translate a symbol's
representation into bits, and it is reasonable to say
that a computer manipulates those bits
algorithmically. But the computer has no awareness of
the represented.
Mark 4-9-05:
A few moments again you equated a computer with a
shovel.
The term "represented" here implies you can absolutely
identify the "real" from the "unreal". How is that so
Scott?
Scott:
Intellect does.
Mark 4-9-05:
Identify the real from the unreal?
Howz that done then?
Scott:
So while it makes sense to say that computers
manipulate the representations of symbols, it is
people who manipulate symbols, sometimes with the aid
of a computer, and it makes no sense, in this context
(debating intellect), to say that a computer
manipulates symbols.
- Scott
Mark 4-9-05:
All you have done is confirm that the distinction
between technology and Human beings is artificial.
Thanks.
Mark
___________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Sep 04 2005 - 01:08:54 BST