> Well, of course they can be explained by me -- but the acronym for > that sort of explanation is "BS"
I take your point with important caveats (that you allude to). Yes, nearly all decisions are made as reflexes or pattern-matchings on what is effectively compiled knowledge; however, it is the structuring of future actions that make us the learning, intelligent entities that we are. > The process of explaining why we have done what we have done is an > important aspect of human intelligence -- but not because it is > accurate, it almost never is.... More because this sort of > storytelling helps us to structure our future actions (though > generally in ways we cannot accurately understand or explain ;-) Explaining our actions is the reflective part of our minds evaluating the reflexive part of our mind. The reflexive part of our minds, though, operates analogously to a machine running on compiled code with the compilation of code being largely *not* under the control of our conscious mind (though some degree of this *can* be changed by our conscious minds). The more we can correctly interpret and affect/program the reflexive part of our mind with the reflective part, the more intelligent we are. And, translating this back to the machine realm circles back to my initial point, the better the machine can explain it's reasoning and use it's explanation to improve it's future actions, the more intelligent the machine is (or, in reverse, no explanation = no intelligence). ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ben Goertzel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <agi@v2.listbox.com> Sent: Monday, December 04, 2006 12:17 PM Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: [agi] A question on the symbol-system hypothesis >> We're reaching the point of agreeing to disagree except . . . . >> >> Are you really saying that nearly all of your decisions can't be explained >> (by you)? > > Well, of course they can be explained by me -- but the acronym for > that sort of explanation is "BS" > > One of Nietzsche's many nice quotes is (paraphrased): "Consciousness > is like the army commander who takes responsibility for the > largely-autonomous actions of his troops." > > Recall also Gazzaniga's work on split-brain patients, for insight into > the illusionary nature of many human explanations of "reasons for > actions." > > The process of explaining why we have done what we have done is an > important aspect of human intelligence -- but not because it is > accurate, it almost never is.... More because this sort of > storytelling helps us to structure our future actions (though > generally in ways we cannot accurately understand or explain ;-) > > Some of the discussion here is relevant > > http://www.goertzel.org/dynapsyc/2004/FreeWill.htm > > -- Ben > > ----- > This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email > To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to: > http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=303 > ----- This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to: http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=303
