Principles of Being an Intelligent Being

July 19, 2021 Artifical Intelligence, Cognitive Insights No Comments

Strange times. We are living at the borders of old and new intelligences. We’ll need some agreement in seeing what it’s about.

Intelligence is in the eye of the beholder.

Definitions of intelligence abound. Therefore, it is better to start from the really basic, where it can be hardly even more basic. There, it’s the easiest to see whether we can agree.

‘We’ is human and artificial intelligence ― well, any intelligence in past, present, and future. We need a scheme to be able to communicate and understand each other. We need it to recognize each other and feel related. There is nothing worse than intelligences being completely alien to each other.

So, starting with one principle, which is also the principle of being alive:

“I move.”

Even in this one principle, there are two sides:

  • Without ‘I,’ there is nothing to be intelligent, no ‘intelligent being.’
  • Without ‘move,’ the ‘I’ is just a static substance, thus also no ‘intelligent being.’

Note that any living entity changes/moves in relevant ways while staying itself.

Going from information to knowledge/intelligence [see: “About ‘Intelligence’ (in A.I.)“]:

  • Without movement, there may be information but no intelligence.
  • With relevant movement, information becomes active, therefore, intelligent.

In other words, the basic preconditions for intelligence are a sense of stability (‘I’) and a sense of progress (‘move’).

Conservation and progression, as in US politics. Is this a coincidence? Here too, nothing worse than being alien to each other.

We need some more principles to make this happen in reality.

I discern two static principles (there is → being now, knowledge representation)

  • concepts → handling many models – of things, of environment, of oneself
  • relations → relating models to each other – using reference frames; conceptual features are other models

I also discern two dynamic principles (there moves → being later on, knowledge manipulation)

  • movement → at least, movement of attention – reuse of resources; one cannot put all resources continually everywhere
  • learning → adapting to a continuous change in the environment

These seem pretty universal. For instance, one can see through them the four principles of what qualifies as ‘intelligent’ according to Jeff Hawkins. [Jeff Hawkins, 2021]

The right balance

This is not a fit ‘once and for all.’ Any intelligent being needs a continual trade-off, as well as a striving for an optimal synthesis of both:

  • With an excessive preponderance of the dynamic, we lose the ‘I’ in the equation. There is just movement from here to there to anywhere.
  • With an excessive preponderance of the static, the ‘I’ makes no sense. For instance, a stone cannot be called intelligent, nor a book or a database by itself. No self-initiated movement, no intelligence.

Interestingly, this brings intelligence together with being alive.

One can see degrees of intelligence. One can see degrees of complexity in being alive.

As simple as it may be, a living being can be seen as intelligent. The simplest being is just a tiny bit intelligent. Also, even a little bit of intelligence makes something alive, at least in the vein of the principles as just described.

Note that consciousness is not in this picture. Still, there is ethics involved: If something is intelligent, then it is alive. If it’s intelligent and alive, it needs to be treated with due respect.

Also, there is a huge continuum towards us, and further on. Sorry if disappointing, but in the continuum of intelligence, we are just somewhere at the beginning.

Scary indeed. That’s why we should face it and not hide for ‘the big bad wolf’ that is coming towards us from the future on planet Earth.

We’d better try to let it become a big Compassionate Artificial intelligence.

References

[Jeff Hawkins, 2021] A Thousand Brains: A New Theory of Intelligence

Leave a Reply

Related Posts

Why Superficial Ethics isn’t Ethical in A.I.

Imagine an A.I. hiring tool that follows all the rules: no explicit bias, transparent algorithms, and compliance with legal standards. Yet, beneath the surface, it perpetuates systemic inequities, favoring candidates from privileged backgrounds and reinforcing the status quo. This isn’t just an oversight — it’s a failure of ethics. Superficial ethics in A.I., limited to Read the full article…

Will Super-A.I. Unite Us or Divide Us?

Super-A.I. won’t just change things. It will multiply what already is — x1000. If we are united, it may amplify harmony. If we are divided, it will deepen the rifts. Either way, it will do so on a scale we have never encountered. The time to ask whether we’re ready isn’t tomorrow. I mean ‘divide’ Read the full article…

How to Contain Non-Compassionate Super-A.I.

We want super(-intelligent) A.I. to remain under meaningful human control to avoid that it will largely or fully destroy or subdue humanity (= existential dangers). Compassionate A.I. may not be with us for a while. Meanwhile, how can we contain super-A.I.? Future existential danger is special in that one can only be wrong in one Read the full article…

Translate »