I have trouble understanding you. Do you want mankind to never use word artificial again? Why are words created? To distinguish something, not in infinite sense, but in relative sense. Its very obvious that term artificial is very relative. Whats good in reasoning that because everything is within nature, when you create something with your hands, its completely naturally appearing thing? Would you like to keep saying that computers naturally appeared on this planet, like another specie? Yes, you could, but WHY?Originally posted by Mentat
Yes, everything is natural, because everthing exists within "Nature".
Why do we have concept of charge? Everything is neutral, because everything exists within nature? I think there is even term for such wordplay. What do you imply by 'everything'? All individual entities *together* taken, or any individual entity separately?
hmm. I don't see it. How exactly did I misuse it? Of course I checked dict before posting. As any word in english, this has several meanings. Besides, ppl assign additional meanings.You are misusing the word "artificial" here. Perhaps you should look it up in a dictionary. No offense implied, I just think you should reconcile your reasoning with the actual meaning(s) of the word "artificial".
You restrict artificial to only manmade. I dislike such human-centric view, and expand it to monkey-made, ant-made, etc. Then, its natural to expand this to also non-biological relations, and you notice pattern - closed system as a whole has no concept of artificial. Only relations between systems have meaning to 'artificial'. So, 'artifical' has sense only 'in relation to' specified entity. Computers are artifical to nature if compared to nature without man. For nature with man, they form closed system.
This is abit deeper question than it seems. You need to ask what is Intelligence in the first place. Not just stick with dictionary, but consider deeper meaning of it. Is mirror intelligent? Is river flowing in its riverbed intelligent? Is reflex reactions sign of intelligence? Is computer executing in its preprogrammed 'riverbed' intelligent?Can intelligence really be artificial?
At some point, there is a split between intelligence arisen from repeating of already known program, and intelligence that has capacity to create new knowledge from inadequate input data. Its called forced induction afaik. Decisions made based on adequate input data, like in case of past experience, is called free induction iirc. Its the main difference between animals and man. When animals confront situation not covered by their past experience, they have only one reaction in their program - fear.
So, induction based on solid facts is one side of the coin, and induction based on very shaky and uncertain ground is other side. Its very likely Nth degree of speculation and is highly likely false. Its the quality of such induction that makes humans special. Humans are equipped with brain that has capacity to change its decisions depending on change in quality of partial facts. Thus, although initially empty and very likely to fail, over the course of life all of the partial facts help to make successful induction. Its a system that evolves internally, and although all people are equipped equally, they develop very different levels of intelligence. Like same holographic plate can hold images with differing levels of details, dependant on parts of it.
Now, it may be easier to see that to copy knowledge of facts and their relations is only small part of intelligence. This can be easily done with computers. But to make computer intelligent on similar scale as humans, one needs first to equip them with ability to evolve, and then let them evolve over time. Even though we still don't know how brain is able to do that, if we suppose that we can copy that, its not enough to make intelligence. Even if we copy all partial facts of a given human, we replicate specific entity. But it has then capacity to evolve further than with what we equipped it with, and that part of it can't be really artificial. Such intelligence becomes genuine shortly even after being released from factory. Selfinteraction of a closed system with only partial inputs from outside leads to a whole that is much larger than the sum of its parts.
You can transfer (partial) facts, but you can't transfer understanding, its something inherent to an entity, and must happen inside.
Whether manmade computer with ability to do forced induction and that has developed IQ xxx over course of hundred years is artificial intelligence, in my view depends on difference between amount of intelligence transferred to it and amount it was able to develop on its own. If the difference is nil, its artificial, like manmade, if diff is large, its genuine. And I don't consider amount of factual data as intelligence, so knowledge != intelligence. Its not the knowledge that counts, but what you DO with it.