btaplin@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (bradley taplin) (03/18/91)
In another article Walid Saba writes (paraphrasing a bit): >... human intelligence is guided, trained, and so on... Human intelligence is due to both nature and nurture. Of course a hungry mind requires food, but the undeveloped "I" to which we implicitly refer in this discussion is there at birth (I think). >... no real difference between natural and artifical int... Maybe, but the term AI seems useful, if not fully descriptive. I suppose most mean intelligence that we create or that programs we design help us create, or something to that effect. >...Either we have intelliegnce, or we do don't. >This is just my view. >W. Saba ----- I think W. Saba oversimplifies the situation. What precisely is this thing we may or may not have? Second, can it not be had in degrees, as with strength or agility? Third, are there more than one or two flavors of intelligence, as in Joe juggles known abstractions well but lacks foresight, whereas Jill can be considered a visionary? Has anyone examined these to see (if at all possible) which characteristics are essential to our intelligence and which could be gotten along without? Were a program very good at one or two of the numerous things commonly attributed to intelligence, say foresight and caution, but relatively lousy at envisioning relationships, would this be a case of some intelligence, an incomplete intelligence, or a fully developed but specialized flavor of intelligence? I suppose these ought to be broken up and dealt with seperately, but I wanted to squeeze an adequate response into a short article. Forgive me. I lack foresight, and may be considered stupid.