N.Wells
Posts: 1836
Joined: Oct. 2005
|
| Quote (GaryGaulin @ May 31 2015,11:00) | | Quote (N.Wells @ May 31 2015,09:44) | | That, incidentally, is an out and out lie, so try and back that up too, while you are at it. I have never said anything remotely like that, so if you can't back it up, it's a libel for which I demand a retraction and an apology. |
You trashed my computer models and theory by pretending to be a "ground-truthing" expert who needs generalizations like this:
| Quote | | “Intelligent behavior is a composite ability to predict one’s environment coupled with a translation of each prediction into a suitable response in light of some objective.” |
instead of this:
| Quote | The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, whereby the behavior of matter powers a coexisting trinity of systematically self-similar (in each other's image, likeness) intelligent systems at the molecular, cellular and multicellular level as follows:
(1) Molecular Level Intelligence: Behavior of matter causes self-assembly of molecular systems that in time become molecular level intelligence, where biological RNA and DNA memory systems learn over time by replication of their accumulated genetic knowledge through a lineage of successive offspring. This intelligence level controls basic growth and division of our cells, is a primary source of our instinctual behaviors, and causes molecular level social differentiation (i.e. speciation).
(2) Cellular Level Intelligence: Molecular level intelligence is the intelligent cause of cellular level intelligence. This intelligence level controls moment to moment cellular responses such as locomotion/migration and cellular level social differentiation (i.e. neural plasticity). At our conception we were only at the cellular intelligence level. Two molecular intelligence systems (egg and sperm) which are on their own unable to self-replicate combined into a single self-replicating cell, called a zygote. The zygote then divided to become a colony of cells called an embryo. Later during fetal development we became a functional multicellular intelligence with self-learning brain to control motor muscle movements (also sweat gland motor muscles).
(3) Multicellular Level Intelligence: Cellular level intelligence is the intelligent cause of multicellular level intelligence. In this case a multicellular body is controlled by an intelligent neural brain expressing all three intelligence levels at once, resulting in our complex and powerful paternal (fatherly), maternal (motherly) and other behaviors. This intelligence level controls our moment to moment multicellular responses, locomotion/migration and multicellular level social differentiation (i.e. occupation). Successful designs remain in the biosphere’s interconnected collective (RNA/DNA) memory to help keep going the billions year old cycle of life where in our case not all individuals must reproduce for the human lineage to benefit from all in society.
Reciprocal cause/causation goes in both the forward and reverse direction. These behavioral pathways cause all of our complex intelligence related behaviors to connect back to the behavior of matter, which does not necessarily need to be intelligent to be the fundamental source of consciousness.
A behavior from any system qualifies as intelligent behavior by meeting all four circuit requirements for this ability, which are: [1] something to control (body or modeling platform) with motor muscles (proteins, electric speaker, electronic write to a screen), [2] Random Access Memory (RAM) addressed by sensory sensors where each motor action and its associated confidence value are separate data elements, [3] confidence (central hedonic, homeostasis) system that increments (stored in memory) confidence value of a successful motor action else decrements the confidence value, [4] guess mechanism for a new memory action when associated confidence level sufficiently decreases. For flagella powered cells a random guess response (to a new heading) is designed into the motor system by the action of reversing motor direction causing it to “tumble”.
At all biological intelligence levels whatever sensory the system has to work with addresses a memory that works like a random access memory chip used in a computer. It is possible to put the contents of a RAM into a Read Only Memory (ROM) but using a ROM instead of RAM takes away the system's ability to self-learn, it cannot form new memories that are needed to adapt to new environments. The result is more of a zombie that may at first appear to be a fully functional intelligence but they are missing something necessary, a RAM in the circuit, not a ROM. Behavior of matter does not need to be intelligent, a fully trained (all knowing) ROM could be used to produce atomic/molecular behavior. But a ROM would not work where intelligent behavior is needed. Unless the ROM contains all-knowing knowledge of the future and all the humans it will ever meet in its lifetime it can never recall memories of meeting them, or their name and what they look like.
For machine intelligence the IBM Watson system that won at Jeopardy qualifies as intelligent. Word combinations for hypotheses were guessed then tested against memory for confidence in each being a hypothesis that is true and whether confident enough in its best answer to push a button/buzzer. The Watson platform had a speaker (for vocal muscles) and muscles guiding a pen was simulated by an electric powered writing device.
For computer modeling purposes the behavior of matter can be thought of as being “all-knowing” in the sense that the behavior is inherent, does not have to learn its responses. A computer model then starts off with this behavior already in memory and has no GUESS or CONFIDENCE included in the algorithm, as does intelligence. Memory contents then never changes. Only a GUESS can write new data to memory and GUESS must here be taken out of the algorithm. But it is possible to leave the CONFIDENCE in the algorithm, it will still work the exact same way. Where this in time proves to be true for real matter it would be a valuable clue as to how consciousness works and possibly how to model it, which may in turn help answer the “big questions” including those pertaining to afterlife. |
for you to be able to in detail explain how intelligence works and how to keep intelligence related terminology in proper scientific context? |
That does not amount to trying to steal credit for Avida. So you lied and are not apologizing for it.
I am not "pretending" to be an expert on ground-truthing, as I do it from time to time in such areas as LiDAR, GPS data, other satellite data of various sorts, aerial photography, mapping, and geological computer models. However, I am not claiming to have worked on Avida or to have worked in related areas.
You trashed your computer model: I've merely been pointing out how you trashed your model. Regardless, however, that has nothing to do with your previous assertions.
Fogel et al.'s definition could stand improvement, but it is nonetheless vastly superior to yours. First, it can be understood. Second, it doesn't contradict itself. Third, it isn't vague. Fourth, it isn't reeking bullshit. Fifth, it is well-written. Sixth, it doesn't abuse standard definitions and usages of words. Seventh and most important, it includes behavior standardly accepted as epitomizing intelligence while excluding non-intelligent behavior. For example, someone who dreams up a melody or re-evaluates their life is synthesizing multiple abilities in order to correctly predict system responses and likely outcomes that will suitably translate to a desired result. On the other hand your incompetent, vague, incoherent, not-a-theory load of word salad contains contradictions and unsupported (and probably unsupportable) assertions, and includes Neato vacuum cleaners as being intelligent, while excluding Beethoven imagining a melody.
|
