Re: Wrong Procedure

"Dave Ulmer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>                          Wrong Procedure
>
>  [...] The next major type of knowledge is Procedural [...]
>
>  Now it is well known that procedures can not be true or false
> because they are only a set of instructions. The question is,
> whether there are indeed right and wrong procedures?
> It seems right and wrong are simply opinions
> like intelligence and are very subjective. [...]

Again, I think this statement on AI springs up from the "intelligent human"
point of view: the advancement of human knowledge and how we
share it with machines. Embracing the fact that intelligence is simply
an opinion is rich when you consider the AI as a stand alone system,
having no intelligent human interfacing. For examples; IQ tests, and
the Turing Test give us measurable opinions on what is intelligent, without
regard to how intelligence works, just our opinion on the effectiveness
of the intelligence at work.

Imparting gross procedural knowledge (programming) to a machine,
is a form of machine learning, where acquiring knowledge is in my
opinion an act of intelligence. This leads me to think that the act of
intelligence is entirely ours and not that of the machine, hence the low
esteem of machine intelligence. Any act of the machine acquiring more
knowledge is subjected to our measure of intelligent effectiveness,
resulting in the concept of your "right or wrong" procedures.

So where do I look for a philosophy on acquiring knowledge that
is not dependent on your philosophy of intelligent AI? I am not
saying that your glossary of posts is "wrong thinking", just that I
need a foil to work on my glossary.

Regards,
Rick