🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1174@cbnewsh.ATT.COM> mbb@cbnewsh.ATT.COM (martin.b.brilliant) writes:
>What is artifical intelligence if intelligence is meaningless?
Exactly - can't we just get back together and have everyone just work
on computer systems, and put away this silly distinction of AI versus
non-AI systems?  Where does it get us?

>I really have trouble absorbing that.  I sometimes find value in
>Gilbert Cockton's unconventional views, but at other times I find his
>excesses excessive.

It is the idea that intelligence is a definable, measurable property
which is a perversion.

I am unconventional here, but not in much larger academic subcultures than
than miniscule AI community.  I suggest you look at the intelligence
debate in psychometrics, and Herb Simon's "Sciences of the Artificial"
- as someone in touch with psychologists, he has better sense than to
want to use such a term as AI.

If you are *SERIOUSLY* interested in this question, there is an
enormous amount of work in psychometrics and educational psychology on
this.

Remember, IQ tests were originally devised to keep idiots out of the
French infantry.  Today they only confirm that armies have to take them
anyway:-)

-- 
Gilbert Cockton, Department of Computing Science,  The University, Glasgow
	gilbert@uk.ac.glasgow.cs <europe>!ukc!glasgow!gilbert