Hi again,

    A few additional random comments . . . . :-)

>> Intelligence is meaningless without discomfort.

    I would rephrase this as (or subsume this under) "intelligence is 
meaningless without goals" -- because discomfort is simply something that sets 
up a goal of "avoid me".  

    But then, there is the question of how giving a goal of "avoid x" is truly 
*different* from discomfort (other than the fact that discomfort is normally 
envisioned as always "spreading out" to have a global effect -- even when not 
appropriate -- while goals are generally envisioned to have only logical 
effects -- which is, of course, a very dangerous assumption).
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Jiri Jelinek 
  To: agi@v2.listbox.com 
  Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2007 6:21 PM
  Subject: Re: [agi] Pure reason is a disease.


  Mark,

  >I understand your point but have an emotional/ethical problem with it. I'll 
have to ponder that for a while.

  Try to view our AI as an extension of our intelligence rather than 
purely-its-own-kind. 


  >> For humans - yes, for our artificial problem solvers - emotion is a 
disease.

  >What if the emotion is solely there to enforce our goals?
  >Or maybe better ==> Not violate our constraints = comfortable, violate our 
constraints = feel discomfort/sick/pain.

  Intelligence is meaningless without discomfort. Unless your PC gets some sort 
of "feel card", it cannot really prefer, cannot set goal(s), and cannot have 
"hard feelings" about working extremely hard for you. You can a) spend time 
figuring out how to build the card, build it, plug it in, and (with potential 
risks) tune it to make it friendly enough so it will actually come up with 
goals that are compatible enough with your goals *OR* b) you can "simply" tell 
your "feeling-free" AI what problems you want it to work on. Your choice.. I 
hope we are eventually not gonna end up asking the "b)" solutions how to clean 
up a great mess caused by the "a)" solutions. 

  Best,
  Jiri Jelinek


  On 5/1/07, Mark Waser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
    >> emotions.. to a) provide goals.. b) provide pre-programmed constraints, 
and c) enforce urgency.
    > Our AI = our tool = should work for us = will get high level goals (+ 
urgency info and constraints) from us. Allowing other sources of high level 
goals = potentially asking for conflicts. > For sub-goals, AI can go with 
reasoning.

    Hmmm.  I understand your point but have an emotional/ethical problem with 
it.  I'll have to ponder that for a while.

    > For humans - yes, for our artificial problem solvers - emotion is a 
disease.

    What if the emotion is solely there to enforce our goals?  Fulfill our 
goals = be happy, fail at our goals = be *very* sad.  Or maybe better ==> Not 
violate our constraints = comfortable, violate our constraints = feel 
discomfort/sick/pain.


      ----- Original Message ----- 
      From: Jiri Jelinek 
      To: agi@v2.listbox.com 
      Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2007 2:29 PM 
      Subject: Re: [agi] Pure reason is a disease.


      >emotions.. to a) provide goals.. b) provide pre-programmed constraints, 
and c) enforce urgency.

      Our AI = our tool = should work for us = will get high level goals (+ 
urgency info and constraints) from us. Allowing other sources of high level 
goals = potentially asking for conflicts. For sub-goals, AI can go with 
reasoning. 

      >Pure reason is a disease

      For humans - yes, for our artificial problem solvers - emotion is a 
disease.

      Jiri Jelinek


      On 5/1/07, Mark Waser < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 
        >> My point, in that essay, is that the nature of human emotions is 
rooted in the human brain architecture, 

            I'll agree that human emotions are rooted in human brain 
architecture but there is also the question -- is there something analogous to 
emotion which is generally necessary for *effective* intelligence?  My answer 
is a qualified but definite yes since emotion clearly serves a number of 
purposes that apparently aren't otherwise served (in our brains) by our pure 
logical reasoning mechanisms (although, potentially, there may be something 
else that serves those purposes equally well).  In particular, emotions seem 
necessary (in humans) to a) provide goals, b) provide pre-programmed 
constraints (for when logical reasoning doesn't have enough information), and 
c) enforce urgency.

            Without looking at these things that emotions provide, I'm not sure 
that you can create an *effective* general intelligence (since these roles need 
to be filled by *something*).

        >> Because of the difference mentioned in the prior paragraph, the 
rigid distinction between emotion and reason that exists in the human brain 
will not exist in a well-design AI.

            Which is exactly why I was arguing that emotions and reason (or 
feeling and thinking) were a spectrum rather than a dichotomy.


          ----- Original Message ----- 
          From: Benjamin Goertzel 
          To: agi@v2.listbox.com 
          Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2007 1:05 PM 
          Subject: Re: [agi] Pure reason is a disease.





          On 5/1/07, Mark Waser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 
            >> Well, this tells you something interesting about the human 
cognitive architecture, but not too much about intelligence in general...

            How do you know that it doesn't tell you much about intelligence in 
general?  That was an incredibly dismissive statement.  Can you justify it?


          Well I tried to in the essay that I pointed to in my response.

          My point, in that essay, is that the nature of human emotions is 
rooted in the human brain architecture, according to which our systemic 
physiological responses to cognitive phenomena ("emotions") are rooted in 
primitive parts of the brain that we don't have much conscious introspection 
into.  So, we actually can't reason about the intermediate conclusions that go 
into our emotional reactions very easily, because the "conscious, reasoning" 
parts of our brains don't have the ability to look into the intermediate 
results stored and manipulated within the more primitive "emotionally reacting" 
parts of the brain.  So our deliberative consciousness has choice of either 

          -- accepting not-very-thoroughly-analyzable outputs from the 
emotional parts of the brain

          or

          -- rejecting them

          and doesn't have the choice to focus deliberative attention on the 
intermediate steps used by the emotional brain to arrive at its conclusions. 

          Of course, through years of practice one can learn to bring more and 
more of the emotional brain's operations into the scope of conscious 
deliberation, but one can never do this completely due to the structure of the 
human brain. 

          On the other hand, an AI need not have the same restrictions.  An AI 
should be able to introspect into the intermediary conclusions and 
manipulations used to arrive at its "feeling responses".  Yes there are 
restrictions on the amount of introspection possible, imposed by computational 
resource limitations; but this is different than the blatant and severe 
architectural restrictions imposed by the design of the human brain. 

          Because of the difference mentioned in the prior paragraph, the rigid 
distinction between emotion and reason that exists in the human brain will not 
exist in a well-design AI.

          Sorry for not giving references regarding my analysis of the human 
cognitive/neural system -- I have read them but don't have the reference list 
at hand. Some (but not a thorough list) are given in the article I referenced 
before. 

          -- Ben G

----------------------------------------------------------------------
          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/?&; 

------------------------------------------------------------------------
        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/?&; 


--------------------------------------------------------------------------
      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/?&;

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    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/?&; 


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  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/?&;

-----
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/?member_id=231415&user_secret=fabd7936

Reply via email to