gts wrote: > > I understand the resources problem, but to be coherent a > probabilistic reasoner need only be constrained in very > simple ways, for example from assigning a higher > probability to statement 2 than to statement 1> when > statement 2 is contingent on statement 1. > > Is such basic coherency totally out of reach for an AGI, *in > principle*? I > hope not.
You would have to assume that statement 2 is *entirely* contingent on statement 1. For many real-world statements of this form, how could a subjective (limited context) agent be sure of this? - Jef ----- 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