Lars Marius Garshol (larsga@ifi.uio.no)
Tue, 6 Jan 1998 09:27:39 +0100
I've been reading a lot about AI lately (maybe I'll write something
for the web site eventually), and some ideas are starting to bubble
somewhere deep down in my brain. They haven't come together just yet,
but Magnus' excellent article got the bubbling started. Basically,
I'm a little unhappy with his dismissal of AI (and his use of Dynamic
Quality in that dismissal) and I'm also a little unhappy with the
Squads rejection of the Subject/Object viewpoint.
These ideas haven't yet matured to the point where discussion about
them becomes worthwhile. I just wanted y'all :) to know why I'm asking
the questions I do below.
Do any of you know of any good definitions of the terms subjective and
objective? Can you think of any thing/idea/concept/whatever that would
be purely subjective or objective? (I'm now trying to think entirely
within a SOM framework, disregarding MOQ for the time being.)
The idea I have is that there might exist ideas that are purely
objective. (I've no idea yet what it would mean for something to be
purely subjective.) The way I'm trying to go to find them is towards
completely objective representations of something. Something like the
symbol "1" or the equation "1+1=2". However, currently I'm a little
lost as to on what kind of level this objective entity should exist.
What I'm thinking is that if something is purely objective all
subjects should have the same interpretation of it (provided they
understand it correctly). Formal mathematical systems might be a way
to go to achieve such a thing.
Anyway, when I find the time I'll sit down with a stack of paper and
try to work this out and see where it's taking me. For now, these are
just high-quality questions for me. :) What I'd really like is to hear
what kinds of responses this sparks off in the rest of the squad, just
to feed the bubbling in my head. :)
My hope is that by trying to find things that are really subjective or
objective I'll get a better understanding of the difference between
the SOM and MOQ paradigms. Maybe the S/O dichotomy is really a
continuous scale, maybe it doesn't make sense at all, I don't know
yet, but I'd like to find out.
-- "These are, as I began, cumbersome ways / to kill a man. Simpler, direct, and much more neat / is to see that he is living somewhere in the middle / of the twentieth century, and leave him there." -- Edwin Brockhttp://www.ifi.uio.no/ülarsga/ http://birk105.studby.uio.no/
-- post message - mailto:lilasqdÉhkg.com unsubscribe/queries - mailto:dianaÉasiantravel.com homepage - http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/4670
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu May 13 1999 - 16:42:37 CEST