I don't know about you but I tend to be an alpha male. I *DO* decide the
goals of the groups that I'm in. :-)
If I weren't such a studly alpha male, I would still decide goals of the
group and then convince the group to go along with me/my goals. ;-)
You simply aren't envisioning smart enough agents.
I'm sure the agents can be very smart, but the group as a whole will be
smarter than any of its members, and a set of competing groups with
evolution
as a judge will be smarter than any one group.
Yes, the group as a whole will be smarter than any of it's members because
it will cherry-pick the best ideas of it's members.
Survival is a good idea. An agent will come up with it. The group will
adopt it.
For example, democracies tend to be more successful than dictatorships
(which
depend on the intelligence of its most successful member), but we wouldn't
know that without war.
I entirely disagree with your hypothesis. I do believe that war sped up the
process but we would have learned the lesson without them.
-------------------------------------------
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
