From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!torn!watserv1!watdragon.waterloo.edu!logos.waterloo.edu!cpshelle Tue Jul 28 09:41:44 EDT 1992
Article 6487 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!torn!watserv1!watdragon.waterloo.edu!logos.waterloo.edu!cpshelle
>From: cpshelle@logos.waterloo.edu (cameron shelley)
Subject: Re: Defining other intelligence out of existence
Message-ID: <BroutB.66H@watdragon.waterloo.edu>
Sender: news@watdragon.waterloo.edu (USENET News System)
Organization: University of Waterloo
References: <1992Jul19.151819.794@wam.umd.edu>
Distribution: na,local
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1992 13:00:46 GMT

reh@wam.umd.edu (Huddleston) writes:
[...]
> Since you're the one writing wrong simulations, you're the one who's 
> intelligent.  I'd guess that you're more intelligent than my cat,
> who's capacity for being in error is limited to thinking that a piece
> of lint is edible.
> 
> But all I'm pointing out is that the exhaustive and endless definitions
> as to what intelligence is don't seem to be going anywhere -- and maybe
> the problem is in the way the question is being structured.

A comedian once said that the primary difference between humans and
animals is that humans aren't afraid of vacuum cleaners.  Perhaps that
would be a good starting point for defining intelligence in general.

</dev/cam
--
      Cameron Shelley        | "Proof, n.  Evidence having a shade more of
cpshelle@logos.waterloo.edu  |  plausibility than of unlikelyhood.  The
    Davis Centre Rm 2136     |  testimony of two credible witnesses as
 Phone (519) 885-1211 x3390  |	opposed to that of one."    Ambrose Bierce


