Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!peregrine!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ames!eos!aio.jsc.nasa.gov!smiller
From: smiller@aio.jsc.nasa.gov (Stephen Miller)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Testing Intelligence (Re: Turing Test).
Keywords: AI, intelligence, philosophy
Message-ID: <714@aio.jsc.nasa.gov>
Date: 5 Dec 90 22:55:38 GMT
References: <4832@gara.une.oz.au>
Reply-To: smiller@aio.jsc.nasa.gov.UUCP (Stephen Miller)
Organization: NASA JSC Houston, TX
Lines: 37

In article <4832@gara.une.oz.au> pnettlet@gara.une.oz.au (Philip Nettleton) writes:
>I thought it was about time I reposted the general requirements for
>determining a system (automated or biological) as being intelligent,
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>			DEFINITION:
>	GENERAL REQUIREMENTS OF AN INTELLIGENT SYSTEM.
>
>a)	The system MUST be able to learn. This implies that the
>	system MUST have a memory for learning to be maintained.
>	Also learning comes in a number of varieties:
>
>	i)	It MUST be able to learn from its own experiences.
>		These can be broken down into further criteria:
>
>		1)	Learning through trial and error.
>		2)	Learning through observation.
>		3)	Learning through active reasoning.
>

congratulations!  I am happy someone has undertaken this important job
of beginning to describe (define) intelligence.  (That is, intelligence in
a non-ethnocentric and non-anthropomorphic way.)

I have a comment, however, pertaining to the above passage:
    If you really mean "criteria", something is seriously amiss.  Do you 
mean "groupings" or "classifications"?  Assuming the latter, it still 
gives me shivers, as it is potentially restricting not only the way we
divide learning, but also what the categorical types of learning are.
    Would you settle for adding a fourth category, say "Other" ?  Or 
perhaps leaving this whole "i)" breakdown out.  There are TOO MANY ways
we learn;  you haven't listed them all;  there may be other ways we haven't
identified yet, too!
    I really think you are on the right track.

.steve.

***** My comments in no way reflect the views or opinions of my employer *****