Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!aplcen!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!ub!acsu.buffalo.edu
From: dmark@acsu.buffalo.edu (David Mark)
Newsgroups: comp.ai
Subject: Re: What AI is exactly.
Message-ID: <36268@eerie.acsu.Buffalo.EDU>
Date: 14 Sep 90 22:35:31 GMT
References: <3815@se-sd.SanDiego.NCR.COM> <35282@eerie.acsu.Buffalo.EDU> <3851@se-sd.SanDiego.NCR.COM>
Sender: news@acsu.Buffalo.EDU
Organization: SUNY Buffalo
Lines: 25
Nntp-Posting-Host: autarch.acsu.buffalo.edu

In article <3851@se-sd.SanDiego.NCR.COM> jim@se-sd.SanDiego.NCR.COM (Jim Ruehlin
, Cognitologist domesticus) writes:
>
>Perhaps the crux of this problem is the definition of "learning" as
>a purely behavioural one.  IMO, learning is more than just displaying
>certain behaviour.
>
>>Thus the "any" in the above quote seems inappropriate.
>
>Agreed, if you look merely at the behavioural aspects of learning.  Otherwise,
>maybe there's little similarities between the exhibited behaviour in humans
>and cats.

Jim, it is difficult to discuss issues such as these if people are
using the key terms to mean sharply different things.  Would you please
provide us with the definition of "learning" that you are using,
either by making up your own or by quoting some source?  I presume that
we are not disagreeing much about the facts of animal behavior and
human behavior, but are disagreeing about what definitions of "intelligence"
and "learn" are appropriate.  And since "intelligence" is such a slippery
one, let's start with "learn" or "learning".  In particular, could you detail
what the "non-behavioral" aspects of learning are?

David Mark
dmark@acsu.buffalo.edu