I think I agree with you, TimTyler. I can see what Legg's definition is trying to say, but the phrase "ability to achieve goals" is too broad; it doesn't do an adequate job of distinguishing between intelligence and other talents or resources.
Do you think the definition works any better if we modify or clarify it by defining all tools (including body parts) to be part of the environment? Then, successfully operating with or without all your limbs (either getting maximum use out of your full complement, or compensating for missing ones) would be an example of achieving goals in diverse environments. Even restricting intelligence to be a psychological property might not be enough, because then ... what about instinct? Do you figure that instinctual behaviors (i.e. behaviors that are hard-wired or automatic and largely don't proceed from reasoning about one's surroundings) qualify as intelligence? When birds learn to take advantage of passing cars to crack nuts, I interpret that as a sign that they are smart. When birds build nests according to what appears to be an inborn script ... hmm. Not so sure. ------------------------------------------ Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI Permalink: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T6cada473e1abac06-Mb7da28694aea9f884243dcd4 Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription
