Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!bbn!uwmcsd1!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!markh
From: markh@csd4.milw.wisc.edu (Mark William Hopkins)
Newsgroups: comp.ai
Subject: Why?
Message-ID: <6823@uwmcsd1.UUCP>
Date: 17 Sep 88 23:40:47 GMT
Sender: daemon@uwmcsd1.UUCP
Reply-To: markh@csd4.milw.wisc.edu (Mark William Hopkins)
Organization: University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
Lines: 51


     Any time that one sets out to deal with a major problem, there is usually
some kind of end-state that is desired, an IDEAL if you will.  It's a necessary
component of the problem solving task; so much so that if you were to lack the
goals and direction you would just end up floundering and meandering -- and 
that's what is often (wrongly) perceived as doing philosophy.

     So this brings up the question on my mind: 
     
  	  Why does anyone want artificial intelligence?

What is it that you're seeking to gain by it?  What is it that you would have
an intelligent machine do?  And when you answer these questions then answer how
and why considering AI seems more urgent today than ever before.

     Link what I've just said in the first two paragraphs.  You'll see that it 
is a recursive problem.  It applies both to AI and to you in the quest of 
seeking AI.  If you want to successfully deal with the problem of AI, then you 
are going to have to know just what it is that you are trying to do.  Human 
curiosity (about the nature of our mind) is one thing, but even that has to be 
directed toward a pressing need -- so the question remains just what the 
pressing need is.  To say that we merely desire to understand the mind is just 
a way of rephrasing the question -- it is not an answer. 

     I asked the question and raised the issue, so probably I should try to
answer it too.   The first thing that comes to mind is our current situation
as regards science -- its increasing specialization.  Most people will agree
that this is a trend that has gone way too far ... to the extent that we may
have sacrificed global perspective and competence in our specialists; and
further that it is a trend that needs to be reversed.  Yet fewer would dare
to suggest that we can overcome the problem.  I dare.  One of the most
important functions of AI will be to amplify our own intelligence.  In fact,
I believe that time is upon us that this symbiotic relation between human and
potentially intelligent machine is triggering an evolutionary change in our
species as far as its cognitive abilities are concerned.
      Seen this way, we'll realise that the axiom still holds that: THE COMPUTER
IS A TOOL.  It's an Intelligent Tool -- but a tool nevertheless.  Nowadays, for
instance, we credit ourselves with the ability to go at high speeds (60 mph in a
car) even though it is really the machine that is doing it for us.  Likewise it
is going to be with intelligent tools.
     So in this way, the problem with the information explosion is going to be
solved.  Slowly, it is dawning on us that the very need for specialization is
becoming obsolete.

     A major determinant of how fragmented science is is how much communication
takes place.  I submit here that the information explosion is for the most part
an explosion in redundancy brought about by a communication bottleneck.  Our
goal is then to find a way to open up this bottle neck.  It is here, again that
AI (especially in relation to intelligent data bases) may come to the rescue.

     This is what I see as for the Why's.