From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!torn!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!olivea!spool.mu.edu!darwin.sura.net!paladin.american.edu!news.univie.ac.at!hp4at!mcsun!sun4nl!star.cs.vu.nl!lbkruij Mon Oct 19 16:59:23 EDT 1992
Article 7287 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!torn!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!olivea!spool.mu.edu!darwin.sura.net!paladin.american.edu!news.univie.ac.at!hp4at!mcsun!sun4nl!star.cs.vu.nl!lbkruij
>From: lbkruij@cs.vu.nl (Kruijswijk LB)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Human intelligence vs. Machine intelligence
Message-ID: <Bw5vFq.2Ew@cs.vu.nl>
Date: 15 Oct 92 11:47:48 GMT
References: <1992Oct7.151533.7822@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU>> <MOFFAT.92Oct14153357@uvapsy.uvapsy.psy.uva.nl> <geddis.719107637@Xenon.Stanford.EDU>
Sender: news@cs.vu.nl
Organization: Fac. Wiskunde & Informatica, VU, Amsterdam
Lines: 31

In article <geddis.719107637@Xenon.Stanford.EDU> Geddis@CS.Stanford.Edu writes:
>That's why Turing Machines and Godel arguments show up:  they all relate
>to notions of what computers are ultimately capable of achieving.  Searle
>and Penrose believe that such arguments prove that computers are incapable
>in principle of becoming intelligent.
I don't think so. I think that completeness is not the same as intelligence.
If the human intelligence would be complete, we would know that the human can
solve any mathematical problem as long there is enough time. I see no reason
why this should be true.

I think that something is intelligent as long as its stupidity is not yet
proven.

If a formal system can be proofed to be correct, its stupidity can be proofed
with a Godel sentence, because it is impossible that the system can answer the
senctence while we can.

However, when the system can not be proofed to be correct (but it can be
correct), its stupidity can not be proofed anymore. Of course the Godel
sentence can be used; however, this is not fair. We can't solve the Godel
sentence either, because we should first proof the correctness for this.

This means that a intelligent machine can not be proofed to be correct.

This also means that every current machine is not intelligent.

Just some thoughts, any comments?

Greetings,

Lucas B. Kruijswijk					lbkruij@cs.vu.nl


