From: khise@sam.ksu.ksu.edu (Martin Andrew Shobe)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Defining Intelligence
Date: 23 Jul 1992 19:34:00 -0500
Organization: Kansas State University
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: sam.ksu.ksu.edu


In article <1992Jul23.223809.11316@mp.cs.niu.edu>, rickert@mp.cs.niu.edu (Neil Rickert) writes:
>In article <14n85cINN9vc@conquest.ksu.ksu.edu> khise@conquest.ksu.ksu.edu (Martin Andrew Shobe) writes: [criticizing my comments]
>>In article <1992Jul23.151338.28804@mp.cs.niu.edu>, rickert@mp.cs.niu.edu (Neil Rickert) writes:
>>>In article <2ZmcoB1w164w@cybernet.cse.fau.edu> justin.bbs@cybernet.cse.fau.edu writes:
>>>>        I. Intelligence requires a memory storage/retrieval system.
>>>
>>>  Strongly disagree.
>
>>But we do have storage/retrieval systems.  Somehow, I have stored that I was
>>born on June 13, 1969.  What this has to do with intelligence is a different
>>story.
>
>  I still disagree.  We have some kind of memory.  But that memory does
>not have a store operation, and does not have a retrieve operation.
>The date of your birth happens to be something that you remember fairly
>readily.
>
>  There are some things you would like to learn, so that you could
>remember them.  But somehow it never works out.  That doesn't sound like
>a storage operation.  There are other things that you can remember today,
>won't be able to remember tomorrow (but it will be at the tip of you
>tongue, if only the word would come to you), and will easily remember
>the day after tomorrow.  That doesn't sound like retrieve operation.
>
>  If there is no store operation, and no retrieve operation, then it is
>not a storage/retrieval memory.
>

I'll agree that there is no conscious store/retrieve.  But, that does not 
mean that there is no store/retrieve on another level.

For example.
  Many large computer systems today have virtual memory.  At some point, the
code for the process may not be in main memory.  When the process gets to this
point, the operating system retrieves the code from storage and places it in 
main memory.  The process itself never issued a retrieve command.  

>>>>        II. Intelligence is about problem-solving.
>>>
>>>  Strongly disagree.
>>>
>>>  Intelligence is all about survival.
>
>>So, all else being equal.  If A is stronger than B, A is more intelligent than B?
>
>  No.  All else being equal, if A is stronger than B, then A is stronger
>than B.  I never said that intelligence was synonymous with survival.
>My point was that the need for survival is the force behind intelligence.
>That doesn't prevent the need for survival being also the force behind
>strength.
>
>  If man was created by a god in an act of creation, then perhaps it is
>true that we were given intelligence to solve problems.  But I happen
>to believe in evolution.  The driving force of evolution is survival,
>particularly survival of the species.  Simple things that evolved may
>have done so out of random luck.  But as the complexity increases, the
>probabilities of random luck diminish.  Anything as complex as intelligence
>could only have evolved because it aided survival.  The fact that it
>happens to aid in solving problems is an incidental side effect, and
>merely reflects that the ability to solve certain problems also has a
>relation to survival.

My mistake.

Martin Shobe


>
>  --------------
>
>  Yes, I knew I was being controversial.  However I was not merely trying
>to be the devil's advocate on this.  These are important issues.
>