[Fis] Liaisons, Alliances, Competence and Intelligence

[Karl Javorszky]

Would you recognize a paradigm changing algorithm if it jumped up from the
grass and bit you?

2023 10 23



   1. What is a paradigm?

We appear to gravitate towards a concept of paradigm and paradigm changes,
which describes the idea as a new insight into basic relations,
necessitating a new recalculation of goals, resources, and methods.

Examples of paradigm changes coming from technical progress: introduction
of the microscope changed radically the way of thinking about cells;
introduction of the steam engine changed attitudes towards labor; invention
of the atomic bomb changed attitudes towards war; invention of computers
changed attitude towards administration and intelligent administration, and
even intelligence as such.

   1. Genius and finite automaton

The dividing line is whether the object is a subject, that is whether it
has its own impulses. As long as there is no spontaneous activity, (there
exists an idle state or being switched off), the entity is an object. The
problem-solving ability, that is ‘intelligence in the mechanical sense’, of
finite automata should be distinguished and termed ‘competence’.
Intelligence (in the second, ‘genius’ understanding of the term) begins if
there exist alternatives which are generated by the subject. React to
alternatives posed by external events, this is competence. Choose among
alternatives that are generated by internal processes, this is intelligence.

   1. Cybernetic examples of automata and biologic systems

We know that thermostats are the elementary simplification of the idea of a
feedback loop and regulated processes.

Let me offer a similarly basic, fundamental demonstration for the
appearance of intelligence: the oedipal conflict.

We have 3 actors, Mom, Dad, Kid. The task is discovering the cartography of
when and where rules according to M and/or those according to D are to be
followed. The infant has to develop an inner sense of relative positions
and gradate the values its liens to Mom and to Dad are worth. The child
enters a 3-way bargain situation, and brings M and D also into the market.
All and each have to recalculate their emotional balances towards the
requirements coming from the other 2 actors. If this is managed acceptably,
socially usual behavior patterns will develop.

The distinctive point is whether the child has sufficient freedom to
develop its own preferences and terms of change.

An extremely over-supervised child will in the best case lose its
individuality and become an automaton, otherwise it must suppress the
non-realized alternatives’ hormonal-physiological-neurologic
representations, which can lead to manifestations of grossly disordered
inner representations.

The existence of the child’s own urges and needs is usually acknowledged.
As long as the child learns to behave, and never does anything that is not
expected from it, it could be replaced by a competent finite automaton. As
it creates a strategic priority that can swing, according to its own
desires, it uses an ability that sets it into the group of geniuses.

If the FIS server would allow drawings, here would be some drawings: 3
points named M, C, D and arrows connecting the 3 points. The arrows
symbolize the bondage between two or more actors. One would draw schemata
of wished-for constellations from the 3 perspectives.

In a different example, the main actors in Romeo and Julliet would be
simplified into dots with arrows. The bondages that exist between and among
individuals are called *liaison* and they express a cohesion.

   1. Paradigm change: learn to count across, not only along *N*

The new technical discovery that leads to the paradigm change re
intelligence, competence, spontaneity comes to us in the form of a family
of algorithms.

The *liaison algorithms *give us the general form of

   - Alliances and coalitions among members of a cohesive group,
   - Aspects of coalition bondages,
   - Intensity extents for the strength of the alliances among members,
   - Opportunity costs of establishing, maintaining, dissolving alliances,
   - Profiles of individual members based on the member’ s partaking in
   alliances.

The *lien values *of the diverse *alliances *of the elements can be read
off the numeric values of the elements aggregated into *cycles. *Cycles are
generated as one resorts the etalon collection on diverse aspects of the
elements. The aspects are properties of *(a,b), *like e.g.
*{a,b,a+b,b-a,2a-3b}.
*The etalon collection is cohort 16 of pairs of *(a,b), a** ≤ b, a,b ≤ 16. *

Counting relations between members of a consistent collection opens up a
wholly dew depth to the linear calculations done on *N*. The consistent
collection is an ordered collection, in which the numeric aspects of *(a,b)
*are subject to the rule *a+b=c. *While Physics investigates, *whether *a
collection is ordered, and at which degree, in matters relating to
intelligence the unspoken understanding is regarding Intelligence (be that
Natural Intelligence NI or Artificial Intelligence AI), that the
intelligent system is working (“alive”), in possession of its faculties and
free of accidental errors. The biologic systems undertaking genetic coding
and decoding and of storing and recalling mental contents into and from
*memory* would not function if not in an optimally ordered state. The basis
of functioning intelligence is that the symbol set is consistent.

The *liaison *values refer to members that are (were or will be)
*contemporaneous.
*Coalitions are made in the moment and for the moment. Whether coalitions
are sustainable and/or remain stable, is a methodically different question.

   1. Self-test: Am I an Automaton or a Genius?

If your contributions to a discussion are mainly or exclusively of the form *“A
says that …, B asserts that …, C’s opinion is …”, *etc. then your inner
organization is *heterokefal, *and your *locus of impulse *is outside of
you (in the so-called objective world) and the mental ability of a
competent automaton is correct.

If your contributions to a discussion detail, how you yourself see a
situation, what your own ideas are, how the observed apparitions combine
into a whole, and what improvements can be suggested to explicatory models
of others, then your inner organization is *autokefal, *and your *locus of
impulse *is internal (because you have understood, that however much you
insist that you speak about objective realities, the fact is that it is *you
*who speaks), or if you discover something (even if that something has been
invented by someone different than you) and you wonder, how you could
utilize that something to generate new and creative insights with, then
your classification is that of a Genius (Eric’s term, meaning a system that
looks for problems to solve and tries to solve them).

Compare yourself to someone who has been told

To grind optical lenses and arrange them

To see very small or very big objects

Set up a boiling pot with valves and pistons

To see that work can be done by steam

Translate a number from Arabic into digital

To see that a sequence of 0,1 is equivalent

Calculate casualties and cost of a war

To see that total war is not a good business



Now you are told to generate a few databases that enumerate *which objects
are in alliance with which other objects in any given need of response, *which
knowledge is accessible by naming pairs of *(a,b) *as individual members of
an etalon collection, and sorting and resorting the etalon collection and
keeping track of which elements can be contemporaneous with each other
under which understandings of order. Planetary mechanics was more
complicated to solve than the functioning of the tautomat. There are
problems to solve, insights to gain, advances to make aplenty. The world
being cohesive and ordered (in topics memory, genetic comparable to an
ideally ordered assembly), having access to a numeric measure of cohesion
expressed as properties of cycles, based on properties of *(a,b), *well,
this should ring a bell even in the most solidly heterokefal researchers
taking part in the present fruitful discussion in FIS about intelligence.

Post scriptum:

Ad Krassimir and context and meaning.

The geometric picture of the *liaison *shows us two 3D spaces transcended
by further two planes. Both 3D spaces have each a Central Element in them.
The CEs have two definite sets of geometric coordinates relating to an
outside geometric construct, also based on *N, *which we traditionally use,
and which possesses a Zero coordinate at *(0,0,0). *

Information is a description of the diversity between A and B. The context
of the information are the cycles A and B are included in. The meaning is a
description of the diversities AB in relation to central elements. The
absolute, formal meaning relates the diversities AB to the absolute Zero
coordinate, the subjective meaning relates the diversity to either or to
both central elements.

Example: Information is the description of a pass in a soccer game between
two players. Context are the other players A and B could have also
played/received a ball from. Meaning is orienting the pass in relation to
the goal posts which are the central elements. The absolute meaning is
relating the pass to the UEFA catalogue of goal posts and balls having been
passed.
------------ pr�xima parte ------------
Se ha borrado un adjunto en formato HTML...
URL: <http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20231023/5e627de7/attachment-0001.html>
------------ pr�xima parte ------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Would you recognize a paradigm if it jumped up from the grass and bit you.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 22878 bytes
Desc: no disponible
URL: <http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20231023/5e627de7/attachment-0001.docx>