[ExI] Personal conclusions

Stefano Vaj stefano.vaj at gmail.com
Sat Feb 6 10:15:21 UTC 2010

On 4 February 2010 19:12, Spencer Campbell <lacertilian at gmail.com> wrote:
> The intelligence of a given system is inversely proportional to the
> average action (time * work) which must be expended before the system
> achieves a given purpose, assuming that it began in a state as far
> away as possible from that purpose.

I would say it sounds a good one to me. In particular since it is not
a white-black one and does not invoke metaphysical, ineffable
entities. What about "perfomance in the execution of a given kind of
data processing"?

> This would make it impossible to prove its existence, which to my mind
> is a pretty solid argument for its nonexistence. Nevertheless, we talk
> about it (consciousness) all the time, throughout history and in every culture. So
> even if it doesn't exist, it seems reasonable to assume that it is at
> least meaningful to think about.

Absolutely. In fact, there are a lot of useful and perfectly
legitimate concepts which do not correspond to "entities". If I say
"horizon", "beauty", "computation", "popular will", "sleep", everybody
knows what I am talking about, even though nobody, except perhaps
Plato, thinks that they have to be something you can rap your nuckles

Stefano Vaj

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list