Talk:Synthetic intelligence

message: Synthetic Intelligence is the engineering term; artificial intelligence is the scientific term.
Both terms refer to the study and development of intelligent devices or mechanisms but with different objectives.
Science has the main objective of analysis and so artificial intelligence work seeks to understand and duplicate naturally existing intelligence.
Engineering has the main objective of synthesis to solve problems and so synthetic intelligence duplicates and develops aspects of intelligent behaviour as a means to solve problems, this may generate different systems with unique behaviour not found in naturally existing intelligence.
: Does this mean that the terminology should change as we move between analysis and application? As for the ruby: the distinction between 'artificial' and 'synthetic' as applied to intelligence is purely philosophical since there is no categorical definition of 'intelligence'. Therefore these discussions belong with Strong AI.--moxon 10:37, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [Untitled]

message: I have revived this article as a discussion of the philosophical issue of simulation vs. reality. This goes along with moxon's suggestion at the top that this term is actually a volley in an ongoing philosophical battle. This also provided a nice place to centralize this issue, since there was not enough room in either the philosophy of artificial intelligence or chinese room articles. They can link here. ---- CharlesGillingham (talk) 04:54, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I note that this section talks about 'thinking' and not 'intelligence'. While I am fine with the notion that Deep Blue was thinking very hard, IMO it wasn't very intelligent (no autonomous learning), as far as my definition of intelligence goes.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Moxon (talk • contribs) 10:04, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revived 

message: Posted a version of this in the conversation above, but this really is it's own issue. Ergo, it's own section.
Trying to find things to help move forward I'm running across two alternate uses that should probably also get some air time, even if it's just a link for one of them. First, as much as this term's use has been shown among AI researchers, it seems more common among science fiction. I have no "reliable" sources for this yet, simply an observation that it pops up in lots of discussion of AI in SciFi. While it is, as discussed factually, generally taken as an alternate term for AI a subcategory of this is the transhumanist synthisis of human and machine. The other use is that it seems to be getting around is "creative/synthetic intelligence. I've seen references to all these uses, but I'm not sure how good they are. Darker Dreams (talk) 14:57, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other Uses 

message: I have deleted the following from the "Definition" section.
:Michael C suggests that AI, is human guided to a specific desired outcome, while SI is free to develop its own "decisions" based on the environment in which it is trained. (1993)
Who is "Michael C," and why should we care about what he says? If you can figure out what source the quoted material tried to cite, then by all means, please add it along with the deleted sentence, but for now I think this should go.—GreenWeasel11 (talk) 00:11, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Text was added in edit] labeled; "Alternate proposal of differentiation based on CRC - Comprehension, Rationalisation and Conclusion". There was a page for Michael C which has been deleted. Darker Dreams (talk) 23:17, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Michael C