Vlad,
You seem to be arguing in a logical vacuum in denying the essential nature
of evidence to most real-world problem-solving.
Let's keep it real, bro.
Science - bear in mind science deals with every part of the world - from the
cosmos to the earth to living organisms, animals, humans, societies etc.
Which branch of science can solve problems about the world without evidence
and physically interacting with the subject matter?
Technology - which branch of technology can solve problems without evidence
& interacting with machines and artefacts and the real world? Ditto: which
branch of AI or AGI can solve problems without interacting with real-world
:computers? (Some purely logical, mathematical problems yes, but
overwhelmingly, no).
Real-world technology - i.e. business etc - which branch can solve problems
without interacting with real products and real customers?
History/journalism ...etc. etc.
If you think AGI's can somehow magically transcend the requirement to have
physical, personal experience and evidence of a subject in order to solve
problems about that subject, you must explain how. Preferably with reference
to the real world, and not just by using logical argument.
As Zeno's paradox shows, logic can prove anything, no matter how absurd.
Science and real world intelligence, which are tied to evidence, can't.
Evidence is an indication that depends on the
referred event: evidence is there when referred event is there, but
evidence is not there when refereed event is absent.
And if the referred thing (entities acquiring intelligence from static
corpus in the absence of environment) existed we would expect to see
it happening, if (as I claim) it does not exist then we would expect
to see all intelligence-acquiring entities needing interaction with an
environment; we observe the latter, which by the above criterion is
evidence for my theory.
There are only evolution-built animals, which is a very limited
repertoir of intelligences. You are saying that if no apple tastes
like a banana, therefore no fruit tastes like a banana, even banana.
Whether a design is possible or not, you expect to see the same
result, if it was never attempted. And so, the absence of an
implementation of design that was never attempted is not evidence of
impossibility of design.
-------------------------------------------
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=106510220-47b225
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
