[Fis] 回复:Re: Fis Digest, Vol 105, Issue 12 Human Wisdom vs Meta-Intelligence
Karl Javorszky
karl.javorszky at gmail.com
Fri Oct 27 13:57:36 CEST 2023
Off topic
Is the server down?
Dr. Plamen L. Simeonov <plamen.l.simeonov en gmail.com> schrieb am Fr., 27.
Okt. 2023, 13:55:
>
> There is no such thing as "Artificial Wisdom": my opinion. I am sorry.
> To have this: you have to change the definition of what "wisdom" is.
> There is no problem with this at all, since we have witnessed much wilder
> re-definitions of concepts/terms during the past 3 years, particularly from
> the leftist revisionists camp.
> For instance, if you allow that AI can be "Alien Intelligence" like some
> "conspiracy" scientists*/influencers/blog writers suggest, then this might
> be possible.
> However, we will need to have proof of the aliens' existence and some kind
> of their logic/cognition/etc first.
> If this happens to be again some kind of automatic/controlled/programmed
> sophisticated "pattern recognition" like the present day AI (ML/DML...), I
> reject accepting it as wisdom at all. To be honest, many human beings in
> East and West (now) come along pretty well with their own
> programmed/controlled/suggested/induced/mesmerized intelligence cognition
> from outside e.g. through the media and other influences. This does not
> imply wisdom from them. Wisdom is typically associated with sages
> (Socrates, Confucius, Lao Tsu, etc.) and old people with plenty of life
> experience. It is also associated with whole nations as a collective
> capability, provided that at least 90% of their population is not used to
> watching TV/smartphone ads & news only. This means that only a few nations
> in the world like Nepal and Bhutan might be considered as wise, since they
> appear to be have their own mind and are resistant to external
> manipulation. Of course, they must have a unique culture, language, script,
> songs, traditions, etc.
>
> Terms like "wisdom", "intelligence" and "feelings" are genuinely human. If
> you want to introduce new meanings to them, you have to compare them with
> the human capabilities and to explain why such a distinction is made. What
> about inventing and using some new term to denote such novel capabilities
> of non-human machines/devices/aliens?
>
> Expanding the language is much easier than creating a mess in already
> messy communications between human beings, even in the science disciplines
> which use the same terms for different things. So, why not use our human
> creativity to call new things and phenomena around us? Example: I searched
> the net some while ago before coining the unique term "integral biomathics"
> as a new field/discipline that should not be mixed neither with systems
> biology nor with any other so far available area for research. Making a
> clear cut distinction is so important for avoiding misunderstandings. All
> these folks who began reusing words and terms in conventional (English)
> language to define their own world and mix it with the one we have been
> living so far have no imagination at all. They have to design their own
> language and their own terms to communicate. Why should they impose their
> new meanings on our old languages? Because they want to rule over us. The
> WHO/WEF/UN folks and all the woke supporters. They are the aliens on this
> planet and they should talk in their own Dumbledore or Yoda language and
> not ours. I don't give a dime for it, because they already know what
> "Wisdom" is.
>
> All the best,
>
> Plamen
>
>
> ___ ___ ___
>
> *Dr. Plamen L. Simeonov*
>
> Director Research Integral Biomathics
>
> *InBioCe
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://www.simeio.org/focus/about/inbioce/__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!U3vU6PswXxgCTghiooM9T-4MvWoM7NO7cFuVaXNi5K4OJv22G_DfxwnsYDN8oiOLPZhFDKBPXocNr7eprH24k_RXj9So$>*
> –
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://www.simeio.org/focus/about/molbio2math/__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!U3vU6PswXxgCTghiooM9T-4MvWoM7NO7cFuVaXNi5K4OJv22G_DfxwnsYDN8oiOLPZhFDKBPXocNr7eprH24k696BNAd$>*Integral
> Biomathics Centre
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://www.simeio.org/focus/about/inbioce/__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!U3vU6PswXxgCTghiooM9T-4MvWoM7NO7cFuVaXNi5K4OJv22G_DfxwnsYDN8oiOLPZhFDKBPXocNr7eprH24k_RXj9So$> *
>
> phone1: +1 (213) 822-7245
>
> phone2: +49 173 7816 337
>
> email: plamen en simeio.org
>
> URLs: https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.linkedin.com/in/plamenlsimeonov/__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!TelBy9HcEnRd_9KAp_9KBctpBdbUgCHf3PXZdCyj4_bHHIf3s_kuLE1FucMoSMl_NKNzX2DX7LWhw3WoNThqteEqAfU$
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.linkedin.com/in/plamenlsimeonov/__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!U3vU6PswXxgCTghiooM9T-4MvWoM7NO7cFuVaXNi5K4OJv22G_DfxwnsYDN8oiOLPZhFDKBPXocNr7eprH24k0Ye4YIg$>
>
> simeio.org
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://simeio.org/__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!U3vU6PswXxgCTghiooM9T-4MvWoM7NO7cFuVaXNi5K4OJv22G_DfxwnsYDN8oiOLPZhFDKBPXocNr7eprH24k-R-jXy4$>
> | ibiomath.org
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://ibiomath.org/__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!U3vU6PswXxgCTghiooM9T-4MvWoM7NO7cFuVaXNi5K4OJv22G_DfxwnsYDN8oiOLPZhFDKBPXocNr7eprH24k7nGm-qX$>
> | inbiosa.eu
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://inbiosa.eu/__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!U3vU6PswXxgCTghiooM9T-4MvWoM7NO7cFuVaXNi5K4OJv22G_DfxwnsYDN8oiOLPZhFDKBPXocNr7eprH24k2Q5q0Zk$>
>
> OurWorldInData.org/coronavirus
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!U3vU6PswXxgCTghiooM9T-4MvWoM7NO7cFuVaXNi5K4OJv22G_DfxwnsYDN8oiOLPZhFDKBPXocNr7eprH24k__jv8Ae$>
>
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://groups.google.com/d/forum/covid-19-therapy__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!TelBy9HcEnRd_9KAp_9KBctpBdbUgCHf3PXZdCyj4_bHHIf3s_kuLE1FucMoSMl_NKNzX2DX7LWhw3WoNThqKVjJfNY$
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://groups.google.com/d/forum/covid-19-therapy__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!U3vU6PswXxgCTghiooM9T-4MvWoM7NO7cFuVaXNi5K4OJv22G_DfxwnsYDN8oiOLPZhFDKBPXocNr7eprH24ky1P_vpV$>
>
>
>
> Orcid ID: https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2672-4405__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!TelBy9HcEnRd_9KAp_9KBctpBdbUgCHf3PXZdCyj4_bHHIf3s_kuLE1FucMoSMl_NKNzX2DX7LWhw3WoNThqHBPPigc$
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2672-4405__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!U3vU6PswXxgCTghiooM9T-4MvWoM7NO7cFuVaXNi5K4OJv22G_DfxwnsYDN8oiOLPZhFDKBPXocNr7eprH24k2Rg8eM-$>
>
> Scopus Author ID: 7006001629
>
> ResearcherID: T-4786-2017
>
>
> DISCLAIMER: This email may contain confidential and/or privileged
> information. If you are not the intended recipient or did receive this
> email in error, please notify the sender immediately and destroy this email
> and possible attachments. Any unauthorized copying, disclosure or
> distribution of the material are strictly forbidden.
>
>
>
> HAFTUNGSAUSSCHLUSS: Diese email enthaelt moeglicherweise vertrauliche
> und/oder rechtlich geschuetzte Informationen. Wenn Sie nicht der richtige
> Adressat sind, oder diese email irrtuemlich erhalten haben, informieren Sie
> bitte sofort den Absender und vernichten Sie diese email und die
> moeglicherweise angehaengten Dokumente. Das unerlaubte Kopieren sowie die
> unbefugte Weitergabe sind nicht gestattet.
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 12:37 PM Eric Werner <eric.werner en oarf.org> wrote:
>
>> Dear Yixin,
>>
>> As you know from my different responses regarding Wisdom and Meta-AI
>> (Artificial Wisdom) I am of a rather split opinion:
>>
>> On the one hand, the poetic emotional side of me sees the necessary
>> inclusion of an ethics of fairness for all living creatures. I am
>> skeptical, like you, that AI can achieve this consistently. I am worried
>> about the ramifications of using AI systems in a military-governmental
>> decision making process.
>>
>> On the other hand, it may well come about that Meta-AI is possible. Such
>> a system poses questions, creates new problems that it then solves. Such
>> a Meta-AI system could rapidly explore different combinations of explicit
>> and implicit theoretical assumptions. Leading to new theories about nature
>> and the world. It could then propose new experiments that confirm or
>> disconfirm its theory or hypotheses. It could see long range relationships,
>> logical, mathematical in different specialized theories or mental
>> frameworks. Meta-AI is one of the founding cornerstones of General AI. It
>> presupposes that reasoning and not just parroting can be learned in some
>> way.
>>
>> Some more thoughts on Wisdom:
>> Human wisdom is distributed and contradictory
>>
>> - *AI models can contain all of human wisdom *- including conflicting
>> Wisdom
>> - *Conflicting Wisdom:*
>> - One societies Wisdom may be another societies doom
>> - *Realpolitik of human wisdom*
>> - As soon as limited resources, come in we get conflict
>> - *Imagine 10 people *on the land that supports 10 people if they all
>> share what they find among the other 10
>> - If they are greedy, it reduces the population
>> - It depends on if they really need 10 to find the food for 10. If
>> five are sufficient to survive on the same land with less stress, then
>> there’s a temptation to get rid of or disadvange the other five
>> - Increase and search or intelligence algorithms whether a genetic
>> or soft can lead to more resource findings
>> - Sharing knowledge leads to greater distributed, productivity and
>> more can join the community
>> - T*he life and death struggle*
>> - Imagine another group of 10 comes in to the same area that
>> supports only 10. Then we get conflict. They may cooperate but half have to
>> die because of limited resources.
>> - Same holds for university positions
>> - Same holds for a limited resources in well-to-do societies
>> versus less able societies
>> - Taking advantage of one side's ability against the other
>> - *Power Creates Laws to Perpetuate Power *
>> - Speech is regulated, prevent thought and action that may lead to
>> change of the status quo of power
>> - Servants must be servile
>> - Those in power must pretend to be generous to the extent that
>> the servant does not rebel
>> - The good master (wants to be seen as Wise, knowing what is good
>> for the underlings)
>> - The parasite must not kill its host, unless or until it can jump
>> to another host
>> - A parasite of a parasite leads to a hierarchy of parasites
>> - L*imited Resources Disturb the Ideal of Fairness and Absolute
>> Wisdom*
>> - As soon as limited resources come into play the ideal no longer
>> works
>> - The group with more power in the given environment can win the
>> resources
>> - With limited resources, there can be no compromise after a
>> certain point of sharing
>>
>> Thus my ambivalence concerning Wisdom.
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>> Eric
>>
>>
>> On 10/25/23 2:12 PM, 钟义信 wrote:
>>
>> Dear Eric,
>>
>> There have many mysteries remained in wisdom. This is one of the reasons
>> that the concept of AI does not involve wisdom and therefore AI is able to
>> solve problem but is unable to define problem.
>>
>> Wisdom is creative in nature but AI is not. It is my belief that humans
>> can build up AI but cannot build up AW (artificial wisdom).
>>
>> Wisdom can only be owned by humans but not by any machines. Do you think
>> so? Please give comments on the point.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Yixin
>>
>> ----------
>>
>> 该邮件从移动设备发送
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --------------原始邮件--------------
>> 发件人："Eric Werner "<eric.werner en oarf.org> <eric.werner en oarf.org>;
>> 发送时间：2023年10月25日(星期三) 晚上7:00
>> 收件人："钟义信" <zyx en bupt.edu.cn> <zyx en bupt.edu.cn>;
>> 抄送："Joeseph Brenner "<joe.brenner en bluewin.ch> <joe.brenner en bluewin.ch>;"fis
>> "<fis en listas.unizar.es> <fis en listas.unizar.es>;
>> 主题：Re: [Fis] Fis Digest, Vol 105, Issue 12 Human Wisdom vs
>> Meta-Intelligence
>> -----------------------------------
>> Dear Yixin,
>>
>>
>> *The Relativity and Realpolitik of Human Wisdom:*
>>
>> Once we relativize Wisdom to human beings and excluded from artificial
>> intelligent systems then wisdom will vary over different human beings. A
>> grandmother may have a different kind of wisdom then a grandfather. It
>> will vary in different cultures.
>>
>> Another problem is that wisdom can be for the good of all or for the good
>> of a few if it’s restricted or if it’s malevolent.
>>
>> “Knowing how” is a kind of strategic wisdom that can be transferred from
>> one person to another or from a AI model to another AI model, robot, or
>> human.
>>
>> To set the boundary between what is beneficial for all human beings may
>> and what is not may in itself create an inherent contradiction. This is
>> especially so if there is conflict between groups of humans or animals or
>> even AI systems.
>>
>> It may be that a met-AI system may be better at differentiating in a
>> neutral way between human needs because of its inherent nonhuman
>> neutrality. This of course, has its problems as well. Indeed the very
>> creation of the AI model may be set with bias, as is seen in the conflicts
>> between leftist and rightist AI models. Determining neutrality may be
>> impossible in a social setting of diverse beliefs.
>>
>> What may be perceived as good for one group of humans may be disastrous
>> for another group of human beings. This is seen clearly in the relationship
>> between humans and animals where what is good for humans is not always good
>> for say a pig or a cow or a duck or a chicken.
>>
>> Thus even the notion of being good for all human beings maybe beset with
>> problems that are potentially insurmountable especially in the political
>> world.
>>
>> So that is the realpolitik and relativity of human wisdom.
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>> Eric
>>
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>> On Oct 25, 2023, at 12:25 PM, 钟义信 <zyx en bupt.edu.cn> <zyx en bupt.edu.cn>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Dear Joe, Eric, and colleagues,
>>
>> For the simplity of my reply I just emphase one point that is, all study
>> carried out by humans should be based on human centered stand. Otherwise,
>> humans' research leads to extinguish humans themself. That would be
>> meaningless.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> ----------
>>
>> 该邮件从移动设备发送
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --------------原始邮件--------------
>> 发件人："Joeseph Brenner "<joe.brenner en bluewin.ch> <joe.brenner en bluewin.ch>;
>> 发送时间：2023年10月25日(星期三) 下午5:17
>> 收件人："Eric Werner" <eric.werner en oarf.org> <eric.werner en oarf.org>;"钟义信"
>> <zyx en bupt.edu.cn> <zyx en bupt.edu.cn>;"fis" <fis en listas.unizar.es>
>> <fis en listas.unizar.es>;
>> 主题：Re: Re: [Fis] Fis Digest, Vol 105, Issue 12 Human Wisdom vs
>> Meta-Intelligence
>> -----------------------------------
>> Dear Yixin, Dear Eric,
>>
>> I very much welcome your complexification of the notion of
>> wisdom/intelligence. First of all, it eliminates the flavor of omnipotence
>> which accompanies some discourse on Artificial Intelligence.
>>
>> One now needs to define further the characteristics of Human Centered
>> Wisdom (what Yixin has been talking about all along) so that the same
>> mistakes are not made in discussing Artificial Human Centered Wisdom.
>>
>> My suggestion would be to look at the kinds of logic ("Eastern" or
>> "Western") that are most applicable to/in the two domains. Are we sure,
>> however, that all our objectives can be achieved by reference to problem
>> solving. Of course, living with unsolved problems simply carries out an
>> additional iteration or recursion step, but it might be worthwhile if this
>> were recognized explicitly.
>>
>> Eric concludes "It seems AHCW is more restrictive than AMI". I agree, but
>> suggest it should be said that AHCW is also more restrictive than HCW.
>>
>> Best wishes,
>> Joseph
>>
>> ----Original Message----
>> From : eric.werner en oarf.org
>> Date : 24/10/2023 - 10:54 (E)
>> To : zyx en bupt.edu.cn, fis en listas.unizar.es
>> Subject : Re: [Fis] Fis Digest, Vol 105, Issue 12 Human Wisdom vs
>> Meta-Intelligence
>>
>> Dear Yixin,
>>
>> Just had some clarifying thoughts while taking a shower (embodied
>> intelligence 😉)
>>
>> You state: "In the context of technical study, wisdom means the ability
>> to define the problem, which should be good for all humans if solved, and
>> intelligence means the ability to solve the problem defined by wisdom."
>>
>> To clarify:
>>
>> 1. Let me define the ability to define the problem as
>>
>> *Meta-Intelligence MI *
>> 2. And define ability to define the problem, which should be* good
>> for all humans* if solved, as *Human-Centered-Wisdom *HCW
>>
>> 3. Define * intelligence* as the ability to solve the problem defined by
>> Meta-Intelligence or Human-Centered-Wisdom
>>
>> Under these definitions, Artificial Human Centered Wisdom AHCW will be a
>> different challenge than Artificial Meta Intelligence AMI
>>
>> Given the right technology AMI may well be achievable and may give
>> different answers than Artificial Human Centered Wisdom, if the latter is
>> even achievable.
>>
>> I think this clarifies the differences in understanding of wisdom and the
>> capacity to intelligently solve the problems posed by the different types
>> of Wisdom. It seems AHCW is more restritive than AMI.
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>> Eric
>> On 10/24/23 9:26 AM, Eric Werner wrote:
>>
>> Dear Yixin,
>>
>> I am getting a better understanding of what you mean by wisdom. Thank you
>> for your patience!
>>
>> This morning I had some thoughts described below.
>>
>> You state: "In the context of technical study, wisdom means the ability
>> to define the problem, which should be good for all humans if solved, and
>> intelligence means the ability to solve the problem defined by wisdom."
>>
>> In mathematics and other sciences, there is the difference between
>> proving theorems and discovering a theorem. Many bright mathematicians make
>> their name by proving theorems. Others like Gödel in his proof of the
>> incompleteness theorem (inherent limits of the axiomatic method) linked
>> together very different concepts-methods (Cantor's diagonal method and
>> arithmetization) to come up with a wonderful result. Proving is
>> commonplace compared to coming up with a concept.
>>
>> Missing from the parrot-like LLMs is true reasoning and questioning.
>>
>> However, I am not convinced that an artificial intelligent-rational
>> system would not be able to formulate its own questions, create new
>> concepts and new method of solving its own conundrums.
>>
>> Here are the other earlier thoughts of this morning:
>> Can wisdom be learned?
>>
>> - Artificial wisdom AW
>> - Social wisdom SW
>> - Artificial Social Wisdom ASW
>> - Embodied AI, Embodied AW
>> - Artificial Ethics AE
>> - Human wisdom HW as generated by experience
>> - Rare
>> - There but for the grace of God go I
>> - We often cannot understand someone until are in their shoes-
>> experience their situation
>> - Examples: Growing old, living in a different country or culture
>> or region, learning or knowing a different subject, being in a war zone
>> - You have to know two or more subjects to interrelate them
>> - Artificial rationality AR
>> - Understanding requires
>> - Information
>> - State
>> - Intention-Strategic
>> - Value - Emotional Info
>> - Operators
>> - Transform information
>> - This gives the dynamics to rational thought
>> - Ability or capacities
>> - Intelligence
>> - Circular?? Rational inference
>> - Questioning and reasoning in self dialogue
>> - Can intelligence be learned?
>> - Seems to require basic competencies-capacities
>> - Reasoning
>> - Social
>> - Emotional
>> - Wisdom (circular)
>> - How organized is the brain?
>> - Inherent competencies
>> - Modular capacities of the brain
>> - Linguistic, visual, auditory, semantic, pragmatic, motor
>> - Wisdom Requires
>> - Experience
>> - Capacities
>> - Reasoning
>> - Dynamic
>> - Self reflection
>>
>>
>> Hope this clarifies my thoughts somewhat.
>>
>> In summary, I am inclined to view the possibility of Artificial Wisdom AW
>> as a very real possibility. It is an open question whether the
>> Parrot-Like-LLMs will ever achieve AW, but a hybrid might.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Eric
>> On 10/24/23 3:58 AM, 钟义信 wrote:
>>
>> Dear Eric,
>>
>> I am also very worried about the military uses of AI. This is an issue on
>> technical ethics and needs the strong cooperation between all governments.
>>
>> We, as scientists and professors, have the responsibility to promote the
>> study of technical ethics in AI. At the same time, we have to pay more
>> attentions to the technical study of AI itself.
>>
>> I agree with you on the characters of wisdom: fairness, kindness, love,
>> for all humans, for all life, and, all in all, for living and developments
>> of all people.
>>
>> In the context of technical study, wisdom means the ability to define the
>> problem, which should be good for all humans if solved, and intelligence
>> means the ability to solve the problem defined by wisdom.
>>
>> Keeping the difference between wisdom and intelligence mentioned above,
>> it is believed that intelligence can be simulated by machine whereas wisdom
>> cannot be simulated by machine. In other word, *AI cannot be creative in
>> the meaning of unable to define the problem good for all humans in solved*.
>> I wonder if you agree or not.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>>
>> Prof. Yixin ZHONG
>> AI School, BUPT
>> Beijing 100876, China
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------ Original ------------------
>> *From: * "Eric Werner" <eric.werner en oarf.org>;
>> *Date: * Mon, Oct 23, 2023 05:33 PM
>> *To: * "钟义信" <zyx en bupt.edu.cn>; "fis" <fis en listas.unizar.es>;
>> *Subject: * Re: [Fis]回复： Fis Digest, Vol 105, Issue 12
>>
>>
>> Dear Yixin, Ma
>>
>> Thank you all for your thoughtful contributions Krassimir, Marcus,
>> Pedro, Yixin. Thinking about wisdom and human nature and AI. Recently
>> viewing the uses of AI in weapons systems already being designed and
>> produced by corporations that sell to governments, made me hesitate about
>> what we are doing. We need a deep discussion about artificial intelligence
>> in a social industrial governmental military context.
>> AI in love and war
>> *We walk lightly along the edge of a deep ravine, *
>> *where can be seen *
>> *the results of passions played. *
>> *Oh, I loved too much, *
>> *and by such, by such *
>> *is happiness thrown away.*
>> *I had wooed not as I should*
>> *a creature made of clay*
>> *When the angel woos the clay *
>>
>> *he'd lose his wings *
>> *at the dawning of the day*
>>
>> (Adapted from a poem 'On Raglan Road' by Patrick Kavanagh)
>>
>> - Wisdom in the wide human sense
>> - Fairness
>> - Kindness
>> - Love
>> - For all humans
>> - For all life
>> - Military uses of AI
>> - Goal directed
>> - Antagonistic
>> - Cooperative
>> - Destructive
>> - Murderous
>> - Anti-human
>> - Financially motivated
>> - An AI model is like a child
>> - It can be molded to the wishes of the user
>> - At the same time, it’s like a mother that responds to every wish
>> - It is an all knowing God
>> - Connected to a robotic system, it can heal, but it can also
>> murder
>> - AI is a child of humankind
>> - All too human
>> - A savior and genocidal
>> - What will we do?
>>
>> King regards,
>>
>> Eric
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> On 10/22/23 9:43 AM, zyx en bupt.edu.cn wrote:
>>
>> Dear Eric,
>>
>> You proposed a number of points which are interesting and important
>> Thank you very much!
>>
>> I would like to discuss at least some of them not now, but a few days
>> later because my notebook was trouble some the day before yesterday.
>>
>> Best wished,
>>
>> Yixin
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 发自我的手机
>>
>>
>> -------- 原始邮件 --------
>> 发件人： Eric Werner <eric.werner en oarf.org>
>> 日期： 2023年10月19日周四 傍晚5:56
>> 收件人： 钟义信 <zyx en bupt.edu.cn>, fis <fis en listas.unizar.es>
>> 主 题： Re: [Fis] Fis Digest, Vol 105, Issue 12
>>
>> Dear Yixin,
>>
>> Can you be more specific what you mean by "change the paradigm used in
>> AI". It might help to give a specific example.
>>
>> *At present AI systems certainly behave as if they are goal directed.
>>
>> *AI systems appear to have wisdom in that they can propose wise courses
>> of action
>>
>> * What do you mean by "pure formalism"? It seems one of the powers of
>> formalism is to understand AI and human intelligence.
>>
>> * It seems AI systems exhibit human-like wisdom when they offer advice or
>> guide the actions of a virtual assistant or self driving car. The react
>> based on the circumstances and goals of the other, at leas to an extent.
>>
>> * Why can't a machine understand human goals and purposes if it gains a
>> model of those from human data?
>>
>> * Why can't an AI system have intentions?
>>
>> My overall problem is understanding your specific criticism of the
>> present AI paradigm? This notion seems to me to need clearer definition.
>>
>> How would you overcome the present AI paradigm and what specifically is
>> different when you want to "change the paradigm used in AI"???
>>
>> This is not a criticism it is a real question in trying to understand
>> you. At present I just don't see the difference between the present AI
>> paradigm and your new AI paradigm.
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>> Eric
>>
>>
>>
>> On 10/19/23 8:48 AM, 钟义信 wrote:
>>
>> Dear Krassimir, Dear Eric, and Dear Colleagues,
>>
>> The discussion is going on well thanks to all your efforts.
>>
>> Here is a few points I would like to mention (or re-mention).
>>
>> (1) The purpose of the "declaration on Paradigm Change in AI" is to make
>> an appeal for *change the paradigm used in AI.*
>>
>> (2) There may have different understanding on the concept of paradigm.
>> However, *the concept of paradigm for a scientific discipline has been
>> re-defined as the scientific world view and the associated methodology* because
>> the scientific worldview and its methodology as a whole is the only factor
>> that can determine whether a scientific discipline needs a "revolution"
>> (Kuhn's language).
>>
>> (3) The major result of "paradigm change in AI" is *to change the
>> methodology used in AI, including the principles of "pure formalism" and
>> "divide and conquer"*. This is because of the fact that *the former
>> principle leads to the ignoring the meaning and value and thus leads to the
>> loss of understanding ability and explaining ability* while *the latter
>> one leads to the loss of the general theory for AI*. Note that "no
>> explaining ability" and "no general theory" are the most typical and also
>> most concerned problems for current AI.
>>
>> (4) There is *difference between human intelligence and human wisdom*.
>> One of the functions of human wisdom is to find the to-be-solved problem
>> which must be meaningful for human purpose of improving the living and
>> developing. Yet, the function of human intelligence is to solve the problem
>> defined by human wisdom.
>>
>> (5) Human intelligence can be simulated by machine. But human wisdom
>> cannot be simulated by machine because machine is non-living beings that
>> has no its own purpose and cannot understand human purpose. No purpose
>> means no wisdom.
>>
>> I wonder if you agree or not. Comments are welcome!
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>>
>>
>> Prof. Yixin ZHONG
>> AI School, BUPT
>> Beijing 100876, China
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------ Original ------------------
>> *From: * "Krassimir Markov" <itheaiss en gmail.com>;
>> *Date: * Thu, Oct 19, 2023 03:32 AM
>> *To: * "fis" <fis en listas.unizar.es>;
>> *Subject: * Re: [Fis] Fis Digest, Vol 105, Issue 12
>>
>> Dear Yixin, Eric and FIS colleagues,
>> Let me present some thoughts about
>>
>> *The “Intelligence” Paradigm*
>>
>> For those who are not familiar with the concepts of "paradigm" and
>> "paradigm shift", I would recommend texts from Wikipedia that explain it
>> clearly enough.
>>
>> I myself maintain a neutral position in the dispute between Popper and
>> Kuhn regarding the development of science. Both theses have their grounds,
>> but at different levels and stages. In fact, in this case, the law of
>> quantitative accumulation, which leads to qualitative changes, applies.
>> Obviously, in a number of cases the paradigm shift happens in leaps and
>> bounds, while in others it happens smoothly and barely perceptibly.
>>
>> For example, the accumulation of sufficient observations and evidences
>> regarding the shape of the earth required a shift to a new paradigm: from
>> the "Earth is flat" paradigm to the "Earth is not flat" paradigm.
>>
>> Sometimes opposing paradigms can coexist, not negating each other, but
>> complementing each other. For example, this is the case with Euclid's fifth
>> postulate (the parallel postulate).
>>
>> The postulate has long been considered self-evident or inevitable, but no
>> evidence has been found. Eventually, it was discovered that reversing the
>> postulate gave valid, albeit different, geometries. A geometry where the
>> parallelism postulate does not hold is known as non-Euclidean geometry.
>>
>> With regard to the paradigm of "intelligence" we have a similar
>> situation. We have at least two opposing paradigms based on two opposing
>> postulates.
>>
>> The first, let's call it the "flat intelligence postulate", was well
>> articulated by Yixin in his post:
>>
>> "Intelligence is the ability to solve problems, but not the ability to
>> detect and define problems, the latter of which is one of the faculties of
>> wisdom."
>>
>> The second, let's call it the "non-flat intelligence postulate", will
>> sound unifying: "Intelligence is both the ability to solve problems and the
>> ability to detect and define problems" (Eric), but in different directions
>> in the hierarchy of intelligences (KM)". This is how we arrive at the idea
>> of cybernetic systems, where there is a controller and a controlled, but
>> the controller is connected to the environment from which it receives
>> controlling influences and is, in practice, both "controller" and
>> "controlled", but in different aspects of the system.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> To be continued ...
>>
>>
>> На ср, 18.10.2023 г. в 15:07 ч. <fis-request en listas.unizar.es> написа:
>>
>> Send Fis mailing list submissions to
>> fis en listas.unizar.es
>>
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>> fis-request en listas.unizar.es
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>> fis-owner en listas.unizar.es
>>
>> When replying,
>>
>>
------------ pr�xima parte ------------
Se ha borrado un adjunto en formato HTML...
URL: <http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20231027/3ce0a1f8/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Fis
mailing list