Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!harpo!seismo!hao!hplabs!sri-unix!spaf%gatech@UDel-Relay From: spaf%gatech@UDel-Relay@sri-unix.UUCP Newsgroups: net.ai Subject: AI and Human Intelligence Message-ID: <4473@sri-arpa.UUCP> Date: Mon, 22-Aug-83 19:45:38 EDT Article-I.D.: sri-arpa.4473 Posted: Mon Aug 22 19:45:38 1983 Date-Received: Wed, 24-Aug-83 12:46:28 EDT Lines: 48 From: The soapbox of Gene Spafford [The following are excerpts from several interchanges with the author. -- KIL] Words mean not necessarily what I want them to mean nor what you want them to mean, but what we all agree that they mean. My point is that we must very possibly consider emotions and ethics in any model we care to construct of a "human" intelligence. The ability to handle a conversation, as is implied by the Turing test, is not sufficient in my eyes to classify something as "intelligent." That is, what *exactly* is intelligence? Is it something measured by an IQ test? I'm sure you realize that that particular point is a subject of much conjecture. If these discussion groups are for discussion of artificial "intelligence," then I would like to see some thought given as to the definition of "intelligence." Is emotion part of intelligence? Is superstition part of intelligence? FYI, I do not believe what I suggested -- that bigots are less than human. I made that suggestion to start some comments. I have gotten some interesting mail from people who have thought some about the idea, and from a great many people who decided I should be locked away for even coming up with the idea. [...] That brought to mind a second point -- what is human? What is intelligence? Are the the same thing? (My belief -- no, they aren't.) I proposed that we might classify "human" as being someone who *at least tries* to overcome irrational prejudices and bigotry. More than ever we need such qualitites as open-mindedness and compassion, as individuals and as a society. Can those qualities be programmed into an AI system? [...] My original submission to Usenet was intended to be a somewhat sarcastic remark about the nonsense that was going on in a few of the newsgroups. Responses to me via mail indicate that at least a few people saw through to some deeper, more interesting questions. For those people who immediately jumped on my case for making the suggestion, not only did you miss the point -- you *are* the point. -- The soapbox of Gene Spafford CSNet: Spaf @ GATech ARPA: Spaf.GATech @ UDel-Relay uucp: ...!{sb1,allegra,ut-ngp}!gatech!spaf ...!duke!mcnc!msdc!gatech!spaf