From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!torn!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!ogicse!reed!orpheus Wed Aug 12 16:52:41 EDT 1992
Article 6586 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!torn!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!ogicse!reed!orpheus
>From: orpheus@reed.edu (P. Hawthorne)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Communication and Intelligence
Message-ID: <1992Aug10.150706.24813@reed.edu>
Date: 10 Aug 92 15:07:06 GMT
Article-I.D.: reed.1992Aug10.150706.24813
References: <1992Aug6.185819.9079@sequent.com> <1992Aug6.203254.11225@mp.cs.niu.edu> <1992Aug10.133447.6855@sequent.com>
Organization: Reed College, Portland, OR
Lines: 60


  bfish@sequent.com (Brett Fishburne) writes:
: I have to admit that I did not take the proposition that a doorbell
: communicated with the ringer when the doorbell was depressed seriously...

: 1)  What is the doorbell communincating to the ringer?  

      Electricity?


: 2)  In this scenerio, what is _not_ communication?  

      Weird question. Seems like asking, 'What is not information?'


: 3)  This is really a followup to the previous question.  Given that 
: everything seems to communicate anytime anything happens, why did we
: specialize in speech?

      a) We didn't.  Sure, speech is pretty cool, we do use all kinds of
communication mediums. My girlfriend is a good example here...
      Seriously though, you mention above that this model would make
everything that ever happens a form of communication. I feel that
whatever happens is information, which can become communication
only if it is then interpreted.
      The subject line of this thread sums up my reasons for pursuing
the grail of objective journalism. Well, that might get me toasted. Let me
rephrase that. How about: the removal of bias from reporting. Even more
pragmatically: the detection of subjective conclusions in explanation.
Er, well, I'll get back to you on this some years from now. 


: 4)  How is human communication unique?  How does it reflect (like many other 
: things we do) our intelligence?  Is it the ability to communicate a concept
: (or abstraction)?  If that is the uniqueness of human communication, then 
: isn't a computer already capable of that sort of interaction?

      Don't restrict yourself to computers here. Why isn't an animal
capable of that? Why are we so uniquely capable? From what I hear of
linguistic research with dolphins, they share our basic forms of
conceptions such as things happening at points in time, etc. but I haven't
heard anything about any creatures other than humans and machines that can
deal with numbers.

      Maybe it's just a matter of who you are and who you know. 
      Really, I'm not trying to be coy, but could it be that human
communication is unique because we have developed it farther by preserving
an understanding of communication itself as well as specific messages
across generations? In other words, our human capacity for experience
as reflected by our collective human civilization.
	Often, when reflecting on my understanding of technology, I become
so humbled by the achievements of the past that I suspect we are the
dominant species on the planet not because of some inherent sophistication,
but because of the persistance of civilization.

      How does the old saw go? Oh yeah:
     'Confound these ancestors, they've stolen our best ideas!'
      Wish I'd thought up that quote myself...

      Theus (orpheus@reed.edu)


