I wrote a book about the emergence of spontaneous creativity from underlying complex dynamics. It was published in 1997 with the title "From Complexity to Creativity." Some of the material is dated but I still believe the basic ideas make sense. Some of the main ideas were reviewed in "The Hidden Pattern" (2006). I don't have time to review the ideas right now (I'm in an airport during a flight change doing a quick email check) but suffice to say that I did put a lot of thought and analysis into how spontaneous creativity emerges from complex cognitive systems. So have others. It is not a total mystery, as mysterious as the experience can seem subjectively.
-- Ben G On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 1:32 PM, Terren Suydam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Ben, > > I agree, an evolved design has limits too, but the key difference between a > contrived design and one that is allowed to evolve is that the evolved > critter's intelligence is grounded in the context of its own 'experience', > whereas the contrived one's intelligence is grounded in the experience of its > creator, and subject to the limitations built into that conception of > intelligence. For example, we really have no idea how we arrive at > spontaneous insights (in the shower, for example). A chess master suddenly > sees the game-winning move. We can be fairly certain that often, these > insights are not the product of logical analysis. So if our conception of > intelligence fails to explain these important aspects, our designs based on > those conceptions will fail to exhibit them. An evolved intelligence, on the > other hand, is not limited in this way, and has the potential to exhibit > intelligence in ways we're not capable of comprehending. > > [btw, I'm using the scare quotes around the word experience as it applies to > AGI because it's a controversial word and I hope to convey the basic idea > about experience without getting into technical details about it. I can get > into that, if anyone thinks it necessary, just didn't want to get bogged > down.] > > Furthermore, there are deeper epistemological issues with the difference > between design and self-organization that get into the notion of autonomy as > well (i.e., designs lack autonomy to the degree they are specified), but I'll > save that for when I feel like putting everyone to sleep :-] > > Terren > > PS. As an aside, I believe spontaneous insight is likely to be an example of > self-organized criticality, which is a description of the behavior of > earthquakes, avalanches, and the punctuated equilibrium model of evolution. > Which is to say, a sudden insight is like an avalanche of mental > transformations, triggered by some minor event but the result of a build-up > of dynamic tension. Self-organized criticality is > explained by the late Per Bak in _How Nature Works_, a short, excellent read > and an brilliant example of scientific and mathematical progress in the realm > of complexity. > > --- On Mon, 6/30/08, Ben Goertzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> I agree that all designed systems have limitations, but I >> also suggest >> that all evolved systems have limitations. >> >> This is just the "no free lunch theorem" -- in >> order to perform better >> than random search at certain optimization tasks, a system >> needs to >> have some biases built in, and these biases will cause it >> to work >> WORSE than random search on some other optimization tasks. >> >> No AGI based on finite resources will ever be **truly** >> general, be it >> an engineered or evolved systems >> >> Evolved systems are far from being beyond running into dead >> ends ... >> their adaptability is far from infinite ... the >> evolutionary process >> itself may be endlessly creative, but in that sense so may >> be the >> self-modifying process of an engineered AGI ... >> >> -- Ben G >> >> On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 3:17 AM, Terren Suydam >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > >> > --- On Mon, 6/30/08, Ben Goertzel >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> but I don't agree that predicting **which** >> AGI designs can lead >> >> to the emergent properties corresponding to >> general intelligence, >> >> is pragmatically impossible to do in an analytical >> and rational way ... >> > >> > OK, I grant you that you may be able to do that. I >> believe that we can be extremely clever in this regard. An >> example of that is an implementation of a Turing Machine >> within the Game of Life: >> > >> > http://rendell-attic.org/gol/tm.htm >> > >> > What a beautiful construction. But it's completely >> contrived. What you're suggesting is equivalent, because >> your design is contrived by your own intelligence. [I >> understand that within the Novamente idea is room for >> non-deterministic (for practical purposes) behavior, so it >> doesn't suffer from the usual complexity-inspired >> criticisms of purely logical systems.] >> > >> > But whatever achievement you make, it's just one >> particular design that may prove effective in some set of >> domains. And there's the rub - the fact that your >> design is at least partially static will limit its >> applicability in some set of domains. I make this argument >> more completely here: >> > >> > >> http://www.machineslikeus.com/cms/news/design-bad-or-why-artificial-intelligence-needs-artificial-life >> > or http://tinyurl.com/3coavb >> > >> > If you design a robot, you limit its degrees of >> freedom. And there will be environments it cannot get >> around in. By contrast, if you have a design that is >> capable of changing itself (even if that means from >> generation to generation), then creative configurations can >> be discovered. The same basic idea works in the mental arena >> as well. If you specify the mental machinery, there will be >> environments it cannot get around in, so to speak. There >> will be important ways in which it is unable to adapt. You >> are limiting your design by your own intelligence, which >> though considerable, is no match for the creativity >> manifest in a single biological cell. >> > >> > Terren >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > ------------------------------------------- >> > 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/?&; >> > Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> Ben Goertzel, PhD >> CEO, Novamente LLC and Biomind LLC >> Director of Research, SIAI >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> "Nothing will ever be attempted if all possible >> objections must be >> first overcome " - Dr Samuel Johnson >> >> >> ------------------------------------------- >> 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/?&; >> Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com > > > > > > ------------------------------------------- > 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/?&; > Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com > -- Ben Goertzel, PhD CEO, Novamente LLC and Biomind LLC Director of Research, SIAI [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Nothing will ever be attempted if all possible objections must be first overcome " - Dr Samuel Johnson ------------------------------------------- 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
