colonel@sunybcs.UUCP (Col. G. L. Sicherman) (11/27/85)
["At last! My new gorilla-detector machine! They can't fool me now!"] > It is interesting that many people seem to define "intelligence" > as "what human beings do". Many times I have heard arguements > that basically come down to: "X isn't a human being, therefore > it isn't intelligent." > > David Messer UUCP: ...ihnp4!quest!dave Well, there are two approaches to defining intelligence. 1) As a trait that helps you survive. But people do a lot of stupid things and get killed in ways that animals don't, so ... 2) As a human trait. This is much nicer. Now when viruses pass info to one another, it isn't intelligence--it's only a disease conspiracy. -- Col. G. L. Sicherman UU: ...{rocksvax|decvax}!sunybcs!colonel CS: colonel@buffalo-cs BI: csdsicher@sunyabva
larry@kitty.UUCP (Larry Lippman) (11/28/85)
> > It is interesting that many people seem to define "intelligence" > > as "what human beings do". Many times I have heard arguements > > that basically come down to: "X isn't a human being, therefore > > it isn't intelligent." > > Well, there are two approaches to defining intelligence. > 1) As a trait that helps you survive. But people do a lot > of stupid things and get killed in ways that animals don't, > so ... > > 2) As a human trait. This is much nicer. Now when viruses > pass info to one another, it isn't intelligence--it's only > a disease conspiracy. What's wrong with the `dictionary' definition of intelligence, which I have always found to be most universally suited, and which eliminates any allusion to anthropomorphism? "Intelligence is the capacity to apprehend facts [meaning actively seek] and propositions and their relations and to reason about them" === Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp., Clarence, New York === === UUCP {decvax,dual,rocksanne,rocksvax,watmath}!sunybcs!kitty!larry === === VOICE 716/741-9185 {rice,shell}!baylor!/ === === FAX 716/741-9635 {AT&T 3510D} ihnp4!/ === === === === "Have you hugged your cat today?" ===