From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!torn!utcsri!rutgers!sun-barr!news2me.ebay.sun.com!cronkite.Central.Sun.COM!texsun!exucom.exu.ericsson.se!pc254185.exu.ericsson.se!exukjb Wed Sep 23 16:54:45 EDT 1992
Article 7009 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!torn!utcsri!rutgers!sun-barr!news2me.ebay.sun.com!cronkite.Central.Sun.COM!texsun!exucom.exu.ericsson.se!pc254185.exu.ericsson.se!exukjb
>From: exukjb@exu.ericsson.se (ken bell)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: My definition of intelligence
Message-ID: <exukjb.220.717190334@exu.ericsson.se>
Date: 22 Sep 92 19:32:14 GMT
References: <1992Sep9.032813.19773@uwm.edu> <hb4n6km.stas@netcom.com> <exukjb.201.717034356@exu.ericsson.se> <bb6npvf.stas@netcom.com>
Sender: news@exu.ericsson.se
Organization: Ericsson Network Systems, Inc.
Lines: 77
Nntp-Posting-Host: pc254185.exu.ericsson.se
X-Disclaimer: This article was posted by a user at Ericsson Network Systems
              The opinions expressed are strictly those of the user and
              not necessarily those of Ericsson Network Systems.

In article <bb6npvf.stas@netcom.com> stas@netcom.com (Stanislav Malyshev) writes:
>From: stas@netcom.com (Stanislav Malyshev)
>Subject: Re: My definition of intelligence
>Date: 21 Sep 92 07:49:42 GMT

>In article <exukjb.201.717034356@exu.ericsson.se> exukjb@exu.ericsson.se (ken bell) writes:
>>
>>This would seem to mean that there is an irremediable and irreducible 
>>element of valuation in the very idea of intelligence?  
>> 
>>What makes one being "more intelligent" than another? 
>>
>>       1. The power to attain one's goals or ends, i.e.,
>>          who makes the fewest mistakes in the selection
>>          of means to attain one's ends, i.e., selects the
>>          "best" means to attain those ends.    
>>
>>       2. Solves [overcomes] problems most efficiently, most speedily,
>>          with least cost.
>>
>>Which one do you like the best here, and what is the most salient 
>>difference you see between these two?     
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>Kenny Bell                          *        Welcome to Mind Wars
>>Ericsson Network Systems, Inc       *        ANTHEM BBS 386-7907
>>P.O. Box 833875                     *        Severity with oneself is heroism.
>>Richardson, TX 75083-3875           *        --A.G.Sertillanges (France, 1943)
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------------

>Hrm..  how about this...

>'More intelligent' means having the capacity to arrive at 'more true'
>conclusions that follow from analysis, available information considered.

>This would mean that an original thinker with little knowledge
>is probably more intelligent than a drone with a storehouse of information.
>If the former person (system) arrives at the right conclusions (given the
>initial knowledge) by means of sound analysis, and the second system
>doesnt analyze as well, the former is more intelligent.

>I am trying to say that the quality of analysis should be more important
>than the arrival at globally correct solutions.  **Intelligence should
>not be a function of the correctness of available information, but of
>what is done to/with the information.**

>Thus, if the laws of physics were to suddenly change due to some totally
>incredible unforseen event in the universe, the sound judgement by which
>the laws were arrived at would still remain sound.


>Stan
>-- 

>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Stan Malyshev           |    Open up the windows and let the fresh air out,
>stas@soda.berkeley.edu  |    said the television to the shackled children..
>stas@netcom.com         |               - King Missile
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now your linking up intelligence with human mentality, specifically
with rationality.  Certainly one can be rational in following rules in 
applying information that later turns out to be incorrect, because it's 
not a necessary condition of rationality in belief that the object of the 
belief be true or correct, but only that one has followed the "best" -- most 
accredited, most reliable, etc -- methods of attaining that belief. 

Your musings are interesting, but now I fear we may be following a tangent.
Unless you can spell out how intelligence is related to rationality, wisdom,
etc. I am inclined to say that rationality or wisdom are ingredients in
a certain kind of behavior exhibited by conscious agents, i.e. humans. But
we were looking for the most general account of the concept of intelligence 
applicable to both persons and nonpersonal entities, were we not? 

Not that the tangent isn't interesting.
//////////////////////////////////////
/* Kenny  *   Welcome to Mind Wars! */
//////////////////////////////////////


