[ExI] intelligence and generalization

[William Flynn Wallace]

Stuart, I hope that creativity is not limited to the arts.  Why shouldn't
an AI create math?

'Physiologizing' is what we in psych call reducing everything to actions in
the body/brain.  So you know that a certain part of the amygdala controls
aggression.  So what?  Destroy it, stimulate it, and you get predictable
results.  But how does that relate to what is happening in a complete body
and brain?  The only answer I can think of that has any use at all might be
to develop drugs that act on the brain part.  Do we really want our lives
to be determined by a host of drugs we take in to activate or inhibit brain
functions?  In extreme cases, yes, that could be appropriate, such as in a
person who goes into rages and loses control.  That person could face a
decision:  go on the drug or go to jail.  But in ordinary life?  Not for
me.  Not unless functions are lost or become limited - Cialis comes to
mind!  (I am turning 77).

As for consciousness, we can find the brain parts that control it and thus
control those brain parts.  But as for defining and copying what those
parts do - I have serious doubts.

bill w

On Sun, Jan 13, 2019 at 12:32 PM Adrian Tymes <atymes at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Jan 13, 2019 at 12:42 AM Stuart LaForge <avant at sollegro.com>
> wrote:
> > Bill Wallace wrote:
> > > I don't have any better understanding of creativity than anyone
> > > else, or a better way of measuring it, but I don't think we can leave
> all
> > > the weight of the ability to adapt to new situations to generalization.
> > > If we could, then I think that building an intelligent AI would be
> fairly
> > > easy. How do we teach creativity to an AI when we don't even know what
> it
> > > is or how to measure it?  This is a big challenge.
> >
> > Perhaps we would be better off not teaching AI how to be creative at
> least
> > not for a long time. Perhaps humanity's ability to create and innovate
> > will be our saving grace. In the not too far off future when all
> > productive work is being done by machines, perhaps art will be our
> refuge,
> > invention our niche, and beauty our forte. I see no reason to rush our
> > eventual obsolescence. Oblivion isn't going anywhere.
>
> Or perhaps go ahead and teach them, and focus some AI on the problem
> of uploading consciousness.
>
> "If you can't beat them, join them."
>
> I, for one, would not mind becoming an AI, if the choice was that or
> dying of old age.
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20190113/a8543f71/attachment.html>