On 2/18/08, Pei Wang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I raised this issue before: by "logical rules", do you mean inference > > > rules (like "Derive conclusion C from premises A and B"), or > > > implication statements (like "If A and B are true, then C is true")? > > > These two are very often confused with each other, and that confusion > > > has serious consequences. AGI needs plenty of the latter, but just a > > > relatively small number of the former. > > > > Sorry... I can't see the distinction. Maybe you mean causation vs > > implication? For example, eating sweets may cause cavities, but it is not > > an implication because P(cavities|sweets) != 1? > > The best example of this difference is Carroll's Paradox --- see > http://www.ditext.com/carroll/tortoise.html
I'm reading this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_the_Tortoise_Said_to_Achilles which is easier to understand, but I still don't get it. Achilles grants to the tortoise that the "second kind of reader" may exist, but I think this second kind of reader is absurd. If A and B are true, then a sane person MUST admit that Z is true. I don't see why not? YKY ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: http://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=95818715-a78a9b Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
