ronse@prlb2.UUCP (Christian Ronse) (06/26/87)
In article <337@umnstat.UUCP>, weiss@umnstat.UUCP (Robert Weiss) writes: > > - From: eddy@boulder.Colorado.EDU (Sean Eddy) > > -But IQ scores are distributed on that classical (artifactual?) > -Gaussian curve. > > Artifactual. IQ _TEST_ scores might possibly be distributed APPROXIMATELY > as a bell-like curve, but only by choice of the test designer, NOT by > anything to do with IQ. > [follows argument about change of scale of IQ] > > Robert Weiss > ihnp4!umn-cs!umnstat!weiss > umnstat!weiss@umn-cs.ARPA In fact, reducing intelligence to a 1-dimensional parameter is an artifact! Current experience in AI shows that `intelligence' has many facets. As said Tomaso Poggio (MIT AI Lab.) in an interview with the Belgian television, we can program computers to make competent medical diagnosis, to give legal advise, or to be chess masters, but we are a long way from building an artificial gardener or housewive: that kind of task is too difficult! Some people will step back from a problem in mathematics, law, etc., other ones will sucessfully challenge them: a question of intelligence? But the latter `intelligent' people may step back in front of a tar-covered motor or the electric equipment in their house, and the former `non-intelligent' ones may sucessfully repair it: also a question of intelligence? The concept of IQ describes what psychologists THINK intelligence is. ``Stars were born of the sky. Not the stars of glass, but those of chrome steel.'' -- Christian Ronse maldoror@prlb2.UUCP {seismo|philabs|mcvax|...}!prlb2!{maldoror|ronse}