Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!samsung!rex!feldman
From: feldman@rex.cs.tulane.edu (Damon Feldman)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: toward a definition of AI
Message-ID: <6605@rex.cs.tulane.edu>
Date: 10 Mar 91 21:50:15 GMT
References: <13477@ccncsu.ColoState.EDU>
Organization: C.S. Dept, Tulane Univ., New Orleans, LA
Lines: 22


	Perhaps the problem in defining AI lies in the fact that
srong-AI proponents believe that "intellegence" is not a black and
white issue; it is a question of extent.
	Many people (i.e. me) think that the same processes that
govern the behaviour of a slug govern ours.  Of course our brains are
much, much more complex (but not infinitely more complex).  Assuming
that slugs are not intellegent and that we are, there must be a grey
area where intellegence is not clearly present or absent.  This grey
area may be at the level of bugs, birds, or whatever.
	In short, the word "intellegence" has a colloquial meaning
that is not precise enough to be used in deciding if artificial
intelegence has been achieved or not, because all we really agree upon
is that slugs are not intelegent and we are.

Or so it seems to me.

Damon
-- 

Damon Feldman                  feldman@rex.cs.tulane.edu
Computer Science Dept.         Tulane University, New Orleans LA, USA