[Fis] THE FRONTIERS OF INTELLIGENCE SCIENCE--Zhao Chuan

Tue Mar 10 13:03:27 CET 2015

Cari Tutti,
geometria, filosofia, fisica, psicologia ed, io aggiungo, economia si
integrano e armonizzano perfettamente. Tutto ciò si verifica se si conosce
la corretta elaborazione e trasformazione o tras-informazione dei concetti:
in una varietà continua si hanno tre differenti determinazioni possibili:
determinazione di posizione o di luogo, determinazioni di grandezza o
quantità, e determinazioni metriche o di misura; il metodo delle relazioni
o analogie; la connessione delle nostre rappresentazioni corrisponde alla
connessione delle cose. Questo e tanto altro discende dal pensiero geniale
di Bernhard Riemann.
Distinti saluti.
Francecso Rizzo.

2015-03-07 14:53 GMT+01:00 Dai Griffiths <dai.griffiths.1 at gmail.com>:

>  Thanks for sharing these ideas, which, for me, raise a long standing
> problem.
>
> The concept of 'intelligence' emerged as an ascription of a quality to
> humans and other animals who are capable of certain capabilities. That is
> to say, the starting point was the behaviours, and this led to the
> definition of the concept which charactarised those behaviours. This seems
> to be what you are describing in your section 1. The Concept of
> Intelligence, with the list (a) to (m).
>
> In section 2, on the other hand, you speak of 'problem solving' as 'the
> major embodiment of intelligence'. In this case, 'intelligence' is no
> longer a description of behaviours, but rather the entity which makes those
> behaviours possible.
>
> There is nothing wrong with hypothesising that an ascribed quality is in
> fact a verifiable entity. We can go and look for evidence that the entity
> exists, and that is often how science moves forward. But in the present
> case the concept of general intelligence (G), as a causal force rather than
> a statistical tool, is open to doubt. If there is a general intelligence
> (as opposed to a collection of capabilities) which can be 'embodied' in
> problem solving, then a number of difficult problems are raised. Where does
> this general intelligence reside? What is it composed of? How is it
> deployed in our problem solving and other aspects of our living?
>
> Our understanding of this is complicated by our experience of day to day
> interactions, in which we interact with people as wholes rather than a
> collection of individual capabilities. This gives us the intuition that
> some people have more of the quality of general intelligence about them
> than do others. And in our language it is reasonable to have a word which
> refers to that impression which we have, and that is how we use the word
> 'intelligence'. But in our scientific endeavours we need to be more
> cautious and critical, and aspire to making a distinction between
> observable mechanisms and ascribed qualities (not that this is necessarily
> easy to achieve in methodological terms). Because of this I am sympathetic
> to Steven's request for differentiation of the topics and types of inquiry.
> If we do not go down this road then we should recognise the possibility
> that we will end up with a theory which is the equivalent of the phlogiston
> explanation for combustion.
>
> My background is in education, not in intelligence research, so I am happy
> to be corrected by those with greater expertise!
>
> Dai
>
>
>
> On 07/03/15 03:53, 钟义信 wrote:
>
> Dear Pedro,
>
>
> Thank you very much for recommending Ms. ZHAO's good topic, intelligence
> science, for discussion at FIS platform. I think it very much valuable that Ms.
> ZHAO put forward to us the great challenge of methodology shift. The attached
> file expressed some of my understanding on this iuuse that I would like to share
> with FIS friends.
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
> Yixin ZHONG
>
>
>
> ----- 回复邮件 -----
> *发信人:*Pedro C. Marijuan <pcmarijuan.iacs at aragon.es> <pcmarijuan.iacs at aragon.es>
> *收信人:*fis <fis at listas.unizar.es> <fis at listas.unizar.es>
> *时间:*2015年03月04日 19时58分15秒
> *主题:*Re: [Fis] THE FRONTIERS OF INTELLIGENCE SCIENCE--Zhao Chuan
>
>
>     Dear Chuan and FIS colleagues,
>
>     The scientific study of intelligence is quite paradoxical. One is
>     reminded about the problems of psychology and ethology to create
>     adequate categories and frameworks about animal and human intelligence.
>     The approaches started in Artificial Intelligence were quite glamorous
>     three or four decades ago, but the limitations were crystal clear at the
>     end of the 80's. It marked the beginning of Artificial Life and quite
>     many other views at the different frontiers of the theme (complexity
>     theory, biocybernetics, biocomputing, etc.) Also an enlarged
>     Information Science was vindicated as the best option to clear the air
>     (Stonier, Scarrott... and FIS itself too). In that line, Advanced
>     Artificial Intelligence, as proposed by Yixin Zhong and others, has
>     represented in my view a bridge to connect with our own works in
>     information science. That connection between information "processing"
>     and intelligence is essential. But in our occasional discussions on the
>     theme we have always been centered in, say, the scientific
>     quasi-mechanistic perspectives. It was time to enter the humanistic
>     dimensions and the connection with the arts. Then, this discussion
>     revolves around the central pillar to fill in the gap between sciences
>     and humanities, the "two cultures" of CP Snow.
>     The global human intelligence, when projected to the world, creates
>     different "disciplinary" realms that are more an historical result that
>     a true, genuine necessity. We are caught, necessarily given our
>     limitations, in a perspectivistic game, but we have the capacity to play
>     and mix the perspectives... multidisciplinarity is today the buzzword,
>     though perhaps not well addressed and explained yet. So, your
>     reflections Chao are quite welcome.
>
>     best--Pedro
>
>     --
>     -------------------------------------------------
>     Pedro C. Marijuán
>     Grupo de Bioinformación / Bioinformation Group
>     Instituto Aragonés de Ciencias de la Salud
>     Centro de Investigación Biomédica de Aragón (CIBA)
>     Avda. San Juan Bosco, 13, planta X
>     50009 Zaragoza, Spain
>     Tfno. +34 976 71 3526 (& 6818)
>     pcmarijuan.iacs at aragon.es
>
>     http://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/
>     -------------------------------------------------
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Fis mailing list
>     Fis at listas.unizar.es
>     http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Fis mailing listFis at listas.unizar.eshttp://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
>
>
> --
> -----------------------------------------
>
> Professor David (Dai) Griffiths
>
> Professor of Educational Cybernetics
> Institute for Educational Cybernetics (IEC)
> The University of Boltonhttp://www.bolton.ac.uk/IEC
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Fis mailing list
> Fis at listas.unizar.es
> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20150310/d9e64d48/attachment.html>