I am presently doing my best to make SURE OF IT. For decades psychologists have shown themselves impervious to rationality and reasoning (and cannot even conceive of behavior in a truly biological manner -- so far are they from a decent start!) They basically do not see behavior as an aspect of biological functioning -- perhaps making the old-time philosophers happy, but not many others.
See, for example: https://www.researchgate.net/project/Operational-System-of-Artificial-Intelligence and https://www.researchgate.net/publication/317380937_Sergii_Kornieiev_Artificial_Intelligence_Operating_System_basic_definitions
Article Sergii Kornieiev "Artificial Intelligence Operating System: ...
Generally, I tend to think, along with such philosophers as Hubert Dreyfus, John Haugeland etc. that "cognition is embedded and embodied": it is impossible to have a completely formal, that is non-biological, system capable of cognition and more fundamentally consciousness.
Dear Bessat Elmie
"Formal" need not be set, so it need not be formal. I certainly believe it is possible to mimic the human development of knowledge so it can be continuous ("limitless learning") but within parameters -- SHIFTING parameters (and thus truly unlimited)
The big question is whether the Computational Theory of Mind (CTM) is true. If it is, then there should be no theoretical reason we cannot model a brain, embodied cognition or no. The CTM postulates that the brain is fundamentally an information processing system, both enabled and constrained by the same mathematical limits of any computation. That is not to say in any way that the brain is a "computer" as the term is currently used.
The CTM is threatening to religious concepts of the immortal soul, of course, but probably (to my mind) represents one of humanity’s greatest potential achievements.
Presuming the CTM is correct, then it seems to me that the quest for true “general artificial intelligence” (AGI) based on models of the human brain should be possible. These efforts are few and far between due to the complexities involved. Recent work has included a useful model of the rat hippocampus (https://www.openslam.org/openratslam.html), a partial model of the human neocortex (https://numenta.org), the Human Brain Project (http://www.humanbrainproject.eu/en/ - widely criticized), and the BRAIN Initiative (https://www.braininitiative.nih.gov). The first two are academic initiatives and the last two are government-backed Big Science.
Dear David Wood
Re: Alternative to Neuroscience and Computational Theory of Mind Report
I have provided the information for a thorough model based on all well-founded and/or necessary characteristics of BEHAVIOR (no need at all to resort to the uncertain (in meaning) brain science). Just see all my responses to all the posts of Sergey Korneev INCLUDING EVERYTHING (i.e. including Replies to Comments -- where actual one major part of the information "resides").
It may be helpful for people in AI to see:
https://mynichecomp.com/AImemory.txt
and https://mynichecomp.com/onmemory.txt
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Computer Science and Engineering
- Artificial Intelligence