From: Steve Peterson (peterson.steve@verizon.net)
Date: Mon Jul 14 2003 - 15:44:32 BST
Hi Platt, Scott,
>> I have also yet to find anyone who has offered a better definition of
>> intellect than Pirsig's "manipulation of symbols." (Since that is the
>> author's definition, I take it to be "Q-intellect.") Anyone have a better
>> definition?
>
> Well, I find Pirsig's definition inadequate, for two reasons. The first is
> that it does not provide a means to distinguish automatic symbol
> manipulation as occurs in a computer (or in a brain) from human thinking, in
> which we are aware of what we are thinking, and feel that it is we who are
> doing (directing) the thinking.
There is that quote in LC where Pirsig says that artificial intelligence
already exists based on his definition. I think he was wrong because the
symbols that stand for patterns of experience that are manipulated by the
computer, don't stand for patterns of experience *of the computer*. They
aren't really symbols for the computer because they don't symbolize anything
so the computer is not thinking by Pirsig's definition. In short, I like
Pirsig's definition of intellect, but I think he misapplied it to AI.
Thanks,
Steve
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 : Mon Jul 14 2003 - 15:45:23 BST