DPRG
DPRG List  



DPRG: Re: Little Ricci 2

Subject: DPRG: Re: Little Ricci 2
From: Ron Blue rcb5 at msn.com
Date: Mon Jan 5 21:18:30 CST 1998

>> Was it controlled by a radio or computer program?  If so it was not
>> intelligent it only gave the appearance of intelligence.
>
>After reading this line I would be interested in your definition of
>´intelligence´.
>But: please try to keep it as easy as possible to you, because I´m not
>very keen in
>english language and have some difficulties in understanding extreme
>technical or
>scientific words. Thanks.
>
>Bye, Mike

All knowledge and opinions are subject to change.

At this time I suspect that Intelligence is the capacity to keep multiple
contradictory stimuli in memory without premature collapse into absolute
certainty.

Notice that with this definition RICCI (robot at
http://www.neutronicstechcorp.com) is intelligent.  This is similar to fluid
intelligence found in a traditional Psychology book, but is not
operationally defined.  I have not spent any time thinking about how to
operationally define the above, so I will not comment on any possibilities,
since it would be premature.

Crystallized intelligence is knowing and using the
discovered truths from the past as transmitted through the knowledge base.
A person with learning or education would appear to be intelligent which
is difficult to differentiate from the fluid intelligence.  This is why a
computer or traditional robot can emit behavior that seems as if it was
intelligent.  Traditionally speaking IQ is an academic achievement score
which is sampled from what a person
could have learned if fairly exposed to the knowledge base.
If the score is very high it is likely to be a fair reflection of the
individual.
If the score is below average or average it is likely NOT to be a fair
reflection of
the individual using my definition.  Normally I would say average is 100,
but at this time it appears that if an individual is chosen randomly and
exposed to a rich environment the average IQ would about 120.  This suggest
that anyone with a IQ below 120 or less than about 90% ile may NOT be fairly
evaluated.

The best effort so far to measure intelligence is the speed of processing
in the brain using PET  scans.  Master chess players for example show little
neuro activity while playing chess.  Skill can be learned.  Does skill mean
that you are intelligent?  NO.  It is only the appearance of intelligence.

Now if speed of processing is important and multiple information must be
held in memory without collapse what does this mean in a practical sense.
I would have to support Lee Kent Hempfling assessment of the situation.
If memory and learning is harmonic (which is what COP theory
((http://www.enticypress.com))says it is) then the higher the ratio of
comparison before collapse would be a key to revealing the dynamics of
intelligence.

This means then that the highest IQ would be a person with a ratio of
999/1000 during a standard relative clock speed.  I have not been able to
define this
operationally, but conceptually this makes sense.   What does this suggest?
The faster the reaction time the more intelligent the person would be.
While research supports this the relationship is not as strong as I would
like it.
The slower the reaction time to integrate multiple information the more
intelligent person would be.  While research supports this the relationship
is not
strong.
Therefore intelligence is a relative definition of these interacting
variable.
How many dichotomies or variables are there.   At this time I would guess
seven.  I have already state two of the dichotomies what are the others?
I have not had time to explore this and it is likely that I will not have
time anytime in the future.

What is the result of these interaction?  Guildford's 180 factor of
intelligence would
be a good guess.

Ron Blue

------------------------------

More information about the DPRG mailing list