Threesology Research Journal
Artificial Intelligence and 3sology (56K)
Page 7

Note: the contents of this page as well as those which precede and follow, must be read as a continuation and/or overlap in order that the continuity about a relationship to/with the typical dichotomous assignment of Artificial Intelligence (such as the usage of zeros and ones used in computer programming) as well as the dichotomous arrangement of the idea that one could possibly talk seriously about peace from a different perspective... will not be lost (such as war being frequently used to describe an absence of peace and vice-versa). However, if your mind is prone to being distracted by timed or untimed commercialization (such as that seen in various types of American-based television, radio, news media and magazine publishing... not to mention the average classroom which carries over into the everyday workplace), you may be unable to sustain prolonged exposures to divergent ideas about a singular topic without becoming confused, unless the information is provided in a very simplistic manner.

AI and 3sology pages:

Artificial Intelligence and 3sology Introduction
pg1 pg2 pg3 pg4 pg5 pg6 pg7 pg8
pg9 pg10 pg11 pg12 pg13 pg14 pg15 pg16
pg17 pg18 pg19 pg20 pg21 pg22 pg23 pg24
pg25 pg26 pg27 pg28 pg29 pg30 pg31 pg32
pg33 pg34 pg35 pg36 pg37 pg38 pg39 pg40
pg41 pg42 pg43 pg44        

Here is another example of a multiple intelligences perspective:

  • Practical Intelligence
    is the ability to think in concrete examples and solve daily problems directly without necessarily being able to explain how; the tendency to survive or succeed through taking straightforward, responsive, concrete action. (Also called marketing, strategic or political intelligence -- since it focuses on "the art of the possible" -- or just common sense or simple effectiveness.)
  • Verbal Intelligence
    is the ability to think and communicate effectively and creatively with words; and to recognize, use and appreciate linguistic patterns.
  • Logical Intelligence
    is the ability to think in terms of (and to appreciate) abstract parts, symbols and sequential relationships, conceptual regularities or numerical patterns, and to reach conclusions or construct things in an orderly way. (Also called rational, analytic or mathematical intelligence.)
  • Associative Intelligence
    is the ability to think in non-sequential associations -- similarities, differences, resonances, meanings, relationships, etc. -- and to create (and appreciate) totally new patterns and meanings out of old ones.
  • Spatial Intelligence
    is the ability to visualize, appreciate and think in terms of pictures and images; to graphically imagine possibilities; and to observe, understand, transform and orient oneself in visual reality. (Also called pictorial or imaginative intelligence.)
  • Intuitive Intelligence
    is the ability to know directly, to perceive and appreciate whole or hidden patterns beyond (or faster than) logic.
  • Musical Intelligence
    is the capacity to perceive, appreciate, resonate with, produce and productively use rhythms, melodies, and other sounds.
  • Aesthetic Intelligence
    is the ability to produce, express, communicate and appreciate in a compelling way inner, spiritual, natural and cultural realities and meanings. (This can include aspects of verbal, musical and spatial intelligences.)
  • Body Intelligence
    is the ability to sense, appreciate, and utilize one's own body -- movement, manual dexterity, tactile sensitivity, physical responsiveness and constraints; to create and think in terms of physiological patterns; to maintain physical health; and to relate to or meet the needs of others' bodies. (Also called kinesthetic or somatic intelligence.)
  • Interpersonal Intelligence
    is the ability to perceive, understand, think about, relate to and utilize other people's subjective states, and to estimate their likely behavior. This includes, especially, empathy.
  • Social Intelligence
    is the ability to work with others and find identity and meaning in social engagement; to perceive, think, and deal in terms of multi-person patterns, group dynamics and needs, and human communities; it includes a tendency towards cooperation and service. (Also called team intelligence.)
  • Affectional Intelligence
    is the ability to be affected by, connected to or resonant with people, ideas, experiences, aesthetics, or any other aspect of life; to experience one's liking or disliking of these things; and to use one's affinities in decision-making and life.
  • Mood Intelligence
    is the ability to fully experience any mood as it happens (without having to judge it or do anything about it), to learn from it, and to move out of it at will -- especially to generate resilience.
  • Motivational Intelligence
    is the ability to know and to work with what moves you; to sense, think and initiate in terms of needs, wants, will, courage, responsibility and action -- one's own and others. (This can include that aspect of mood intelligence that can marshal emotions in the service of a goal.)
  • Intrapersonal Intelligence
    is the ability to recognize, access and deal with one's own subjective (or inner) world. (This can include aspects of affectional, mood, motivational and body intelligences.)
  • Emotional Intelligence
    is the ability to experience, think and deal with emotional patterns in oneself and others. (This can include aspects of interpersonal, intrapersonal, affectional, mood and motivational intelligences.)
  • Basic Intelligence
    is the ability to move toward what is healthy and desirable and away from what is unhealthy or undesirable. (This can use affectional and practical intelligences, or be almost automatic and instinctual.)
  • Behavioral Pattern Intelligence
    is the ability to recognize, form and change one's own behavioral patterns, including compulsions, inhibitions and habits.
  • Parameter Intelligence
    is the ability to create and sustain order and predictability -- to recognize, establish, sustain, and change rhythms, routines/rituals, boundaries, guiding principles/values/beliefs, etc., in one's own life.
  • Habit Intelligence
    is the ability to recognize, form and change one's habits (which naturally embraces many aspects of behavioral and parameter intelligence).
  • Organizing Intelligence
    is the ability to create order in one's own life and in other lives/groups/systems. (This can include aspects of parameter, team/social, and logical intelligences.)
  • Spiritual Intelligence
    is the ability to sense, appreciate and think with spiritual and moral realities and patterns -- to operate from an awareness of ultimate common ground (consciousness, spirit, nature, or some other sacred dimension). (This is usually dependent on intrapersonal intelligence.) (Also called moral or transcendental intelligence.)
  • Narrative Intelligence
    is the ability to perceive, know, think, feel, explain one's experience and influence reality through the use of stories and narrative forms (characters, history, myth, dreams, scenarios, etc.)
  • Eco-Intelligence
    is the ability to recognize, appreciate, think and feel with, and utilize natural patterns and one's place in nature, and to empathize with and sustain healthy relationships with animals, plants and natural systems.

--- Multi- Modal Intelligence and Multiple Intelligences ---

And let us add such things as personal hygiene intelligence, bargain shopping intelligence, tool usage intelligence, metaphor and analogy intelligence, ripe fruit picking intelligence, auto driving intelligence, meal preparation intelligence, survival skills intelligence, jewelry wearing intelligence, etc., etc., etc... In fact, a case for an assumed intelligence might well be rendered for any and all behaviors... Thus, again, what are we actually describing when we use the word "intelligence"? Do we permit the usage of the word "intelligence" to describe a behavior we are favorable towards, and yet exclude it if it is used to describe a behavior we find disgusting or dislikable to our sensibilities?

While we're on the subject of multiple intelligences, we need to step back and reconsider the role that our senses (sight, hearing, etc.) play. Whereas we claim that there is that which is described as "normal" sight, hearing, sensation, etc., these physical attributes may actually have greater differences from person to person than most of us customarily acknowledge or admit, though most of us generally recognize differences amongst siblings. Such an existence of "being different" is already recognized on superficial accounts such as when a doctor emphasizes "regularity" (bowel movement) with respect to you and your circumstances. In other words, "being normal" means whatever your "normal" bowel movements are as opposed to someone else's "normal" bowel movements. With this said, differences may well be obvious such as deafness or blindness, but they might also be due to subtle, almost imperceptible circumstances brought on by what we eat, drink, don't eat, or don't drink, ...etc., as well as gender. Not to mention differences occurring in that which people are exposed to in a home, work, or social setting such as noise, ignorance, intelligent conversation, books, materials for creative art expression, nutritional supplements, aggression, narcotics, alcohol, violence, compassion, love, sensitivity, social experiences, wisdom, altruistic appreciation, etc...

In recognizing that the absence or loss of a sense may well alter or determine any of the so-called aforementioned "intelligences," let us speculate that each of the separate (and perhaps alternatively combined) senses are an "intelligence" unto themselves. Some may prefer to think of them as a building block to one or more of the "intelligences," but not as an "intelligence" as most are accustomed to thinking about, describing or defining as an intelligence. We do not think that computers are intelligent though they can perform activities most of us can not do so. Our present "go-between" presence with respect to computer functionality places all the accolades of "intelligent" labeling on humans, and presents computers as being merely a tool of human intelligence. Irrespective of this example one might want to infer when considering whether or not a human sense can have "intelligence" by itself without a human brain to "complete the circuit" from data input to end result "appreciation," let us consider that each of the human senses is a type of intelligence.

Clearly, viewing a human sense (or even memory) as an intelligence requires a perspective not customarily considered. Analogously, most people don't think of a muscle as having any memory, though a recurring bruise or injury in a muscle (or a similar injury to someone else) might stir a recall of a previous bruise or injury in the same or another body part. In other words, a smell or sight might stir a memory but we don't typically consider the odor or view as memory, much less an intelligence. To do so might very well expose us towards considerations that we are indulging in an over-active imagination bordering a realm of nonsense or that a sense is a (type of) sentient being... if not with an active consciousness, than as an intelligence in the beginning stages of conscious awareness; much as might well have been the case for the mental development of our hominid ancestors... even though we of today might well term many activities of our so-called fellow conscious beings of today as that of different types of ("intelligent") madness. (Such as war, rape, murder, misleading advertising, electoral college candidate choosing, kidnapping, assault, soap operas, rock-n-roll concerts, sports, divorce, parties, medical costs, poverty, incest, adultery, greed, etc... )

Source: Left and Right Brain attributes page 2

Many humans do not think as independently as some observers might want to conclude, based upon the information being expressed. To know the "right answer" is not necessarily an indication of intelligence. Hence, we must look at the so-called intelligence of humans of a different perspective, with respect to humanity striving to build an artificial life-form, particularly when humans appear to be playing the very part they are trying to produce:

Humanity is an artificial intelligence seeking to re-create an image of itself in another type of artificial intelligence associated with a computer-driven design. The "artificiality" of humanity is to be denoted in the fact that, as far as we can tell, it is a life-form that does not exist elsewhere in the form represented on Earth. As such, Earth is itself an artificial environment which has re-created (fashioned) an image of itself by way of a three-patterned bio-molecular substrate known as DNA- RNA- Proteins... which can be viewed as a form of triple-based logic with internalized triplet (codon) structures as well. This substrate is thus an artificial construct just like the notion of a God, the practices of various languages, and the cultures devised amongst different groups who have been isolated from one another in the past.

The Solar system within which Earth is situated, is an artificial construct of events that appear to occur by way of serendipitous conditions. The only recurrence which can rightly be described as an actual or natural presentation is that which is described as the darkness of space, or "dark matter" as it is sometimes referred to. The occasions for the existence of planets and other phenomena labeled as the contents of the Universe, are not constant beyond an intermittency. Dark matter appears to be a constant phenomena and is thus the only "thing" which is a naturally occurring phenomena. In other words, the attempt by humanity to create an expression of its presumed intelligence, is like a dog chasing its own tail, or like narcissus obsessed with their own image... sometimes denoted as an analogy for homosexuality.

Intermittency of occurrence, regardless of what length of time used to measure presence, does not validate the occurrence as a natural event. For example, if we view dark matter as a stream and we throw a rock into the stream, the rock is not a natural occurrence of the stream. Even if the rock gets wet or causes the stream to divert from a path, the flow of water will one day wear the rock down to nothing. In fact, it may be that the dark matter of space is just another artificiality that we have learned (been programmed) to interact with. While our self identity allows us to claim a consciousness and intelligence, it is nonetheless an artificiality born of the planetary environment.

Claiming that the Earth's environment is an artificiality is based on the observation that it does not occur everywhere; though some may want to claim that ubiquity (occurring everywhere) can not be a tool by which to measure what is or isn't natural... particularly when nothing except for (the concept of a) god can be everywhere. For some, the presence of plants and other space objects attests to the conclusion that space is not everywhere... or else there would be nothing but space. Nonetheless, it is the closest item of our reality which is most constant... planets with life are not. The absence of life from the moon and Mars, for example, is an indication of its non-uniqueness... instead of viewing it as something special, natural and therefore unique. Humanity, nor its ideas are unique in terms of being a constant. They are artificial constructs created as symbolic reflections of that which is in proximity to influence the components to be used in the design. Much like a collection of different parts to be assembled during the process of a lengthy assembly line. The abundance of carbon during a formative period no doubt initiated the potential usage instead of one or another substance that may or may not have been available during a critical period of assembly. Nonetheless, the collection of basic components does not describe a uniqueness, but an artificiality.

Procreative events like the birth of a child are expressions of re-created artificiality designed to perpetuate some resemblance of the superficiality. Humanity has now been taken down another notch which followed the Heliocentric view, in which the Earth revolved around the Sun and not the other way around. However, these two models were accompanied by the model that all planets but the earth and moon revolved around the Sun; all of which revolved around the Earth... which might be described as a helio-geocentricity:

Helio-centric model (11K) Geo-centric model (4K) HelioGeo-centric (11K)

While there are no doubt variations one might imaginatively entertain, it is a curious thing that most people do not create such models even for creative exploration of different ideas. Most people simply allow their minds to attach themselves with one or another model being provided for by some authoritative entity. Creative thinking is not as wide-spread and diverse as humanity wants to believe it is. Creativity is rather stale and single-minded... grasping on to one or a few concepts with which they and others revolve their perceptions around. "Fact" has nothing to do with creative exploration of different ideas. It is an excuse to conceal one's lack of courage to think differently. People are afraid of new ideas... their sociability is a mask behind which they hide because they feel their is safety in numbers... in going along with the crowd instead of venturing forth elsewhere on their own.

If humanity is a reproduction of (a) god (made in god's image), and humanity is denoted as an imperfect copy, than that which humanity is copied from is not an original. Like a copy made from a copy in a copy machine, each successive copy exhibits a slight degeneration. An original is never reproduced. Hence, a human concept of (a) god is an imperfect image. Even those who are claimed to be a go-between, such as Jesus, Mohammed, Moses, etc., are little more than poor imitations and can give us but a poor imitation of (a) god's so-called word and will. And those that follow in the footsteps of Jesus, Mohammed, etc., are that much of a poorer image thereof. Hence, the copies of today, like the copies of the so-called original word of (a) god, are representative smudges. Each successive generation of followers are lesser and lesser images of the original... exhibited by a decrease in the mode and manner of religious worship.

The birth of children, like reproduced copies, will not readily exhibit poorer and poorer quality from the original, if there is a mechanism which permits a means by which the quality can be renewed by creating an original copy of someone that may little resemble the initial fore bearer. Without an ability to directly compare past copies with present versions of people, it is difficult to say how much of a deterioration may have taken place, unless there is some gross behavioral or physical representation. Incremental changes may go unnoticed or dismissed because they are defined or interpreted as a person's individuality or uniqueness. Hence, evolution is a means by which the hominid species can create a different copy from which degradations proceed but go unnoticed or are attributed as being the result of disaster, disease, diet, destruction, death, debility, duration at a task (job) [related to an occupational hazard], etc... Whereas we may think each generation is more capable, is smarter, etc., what we are actually seeing are exhibitions of activities to cover-up a mounting exercise of accumulated imperfection. Thus, such as in the case of social governance, all governments are directed towards a disintegration and must be periodically renewed by way of some revolution that is called evolution when applied to biology, genetics, physiology or anthropology.

As DNA strives to keep itself a viable entity by experimenting with different life form models, some nonetheless become extinct because environmental conditions change. Such environmental conditions are taking place which will make all present forms of government obsolete. The governing models are not "pure" versions. Neither Communism, Democracy nor Socialism has any pure representations in the world today. In fact, many people would be hard-pressed to label the type of government they are subjected to, because they all exhibit a hodge-podge of different varieties, being over-laden with one or another in a given context. They are all expressions of artificial intelligence. Yet, they are fluidic expressions and not static ones being used by computer programmers who think that all variability can be written into a computer program. It is thought that with enough variability encoded into a computer language, the closer we will come to creating a computer-based (artificial) intelligence. Some overlook the presence of computing code as a variable itself that is not included in an equation.

Because many (human) behaviors are rather simplistic biologically-based electrical activity, non-biological models which are fashioned to exhibit such behavior are thought to be examples of an artificial intelligence. But none of the models take into consideration that human intelligence itself is an artificiality from which models are being copied. In order for a machine to exhibit human intelligence, it must be copied from that which the human copy is made. The human copy is a poor facsimile thereof... with much of its programming code smudged by the copying process. Trying to divine or unearth some "hidden code" which, when written into a computer program will produce the holy grail of an artificial language, can not be accomplished while trying to rely on an understanding of neurophysiology. Just because we can identify on and off switches does not describe the switches as being artificialized copies themselves.

Humans today are not the original from which they have been copied for millions of years. The so-called intelligence of humanity is an artificial construct, just like that which we describe as consciousness. It is like the so-called identity that the Supreme Court stupidly gave to Businesses by claiming they had a "self" and were thus entitled to rights like a living being. Humans are good at using anthropomorphism. Humans make things up and given them a realism as a type of working model that will assist them in acquiring a greater grasp of perceptions whose clarity may be marred by numerous imperfections due to obfuscations promoted by culture, politics, religions, science, and the like. Hunting for some representative model to be described as an example of artificial intelligence is little different than a modernized version of a medieval quest to find the holy grail, the golden fleece, Lewis Carroll's Snark, the bogey man, ghosts, and numerous other fictions. However, a person can be actively searching for, and be prepared to find, something other than that to which they think they are focused. Similarly, some writers produce a perspective that they did not intend, but another recognizes as a map, a clue, a metaphor, or some other tell-tale sign that enables them to make a discovery their experiences and knowledge make them receptive to. This is why some scholars of Lewis Carroll's poem "The Hunting of the Snark" have suggested it portrays hidden meanings traversing the human landscape of intellectual activity, even though Lewis Carroll denied such claims and maintained that the poem was written as nonsense... One person's nonsense is another person's treasure trove of ideas.

For some, the attempt to create an artificial intelligence is a metaphor of human behavior crudely exhibiting an effort to express a procreative function... like the capacity inherent in various biological entities to reproduce. It is an attempt by which the brain of humanity can reproduce itself... to see itself, to marvel at itself... though such an idea may itself be a crude representation of something that is better identified as exploratory behavior seen in many life forms seeking out sustenance. Instead of looking for insects and berries to munch on, some people use their fingers as sticks with which to probe about a keyboard and "uncover" tidy morsels of code they greedily devour... like an artist who says they are merely uncovering an image secretly inherent in a blank canvas that is stripped away by the stroke of a brush covered with a pigment which will permit the hidden image to be revealed... because the image already exists but is too shy to show itself on its own.

So what is it that AI researchers are "really" looking for, if their efforts and actions are merely crude representations of a primate's exploratory behavior? What is it a metaphor of... like the twitch of an eye representing the presence of some unrecognized allergy, mimicry, or unintentional slip of the tongue in a symbolic language? Is the search for AI the consequence, the reaction of some unrecognized circumstance that others are merely mimicking like some sort of adopted fad? And what is to be achieved if we make an intelligence in our own image... since we will then have to contend with a new set of laws providing for rights and protections, such as not being able to pull the plug and turn the artificial intelligence off; or be cited with having committed murder? Of what value is there in having a copy of human intelligence if the copy is that of someone whose intelligence is violent, criminal or singularly obsessed with the task of creating an AI? Indeed, what if the created AI of our image wants to create an AI in their (its) image and so on, till there are more of them then there are of us biological models of assumed intelligence? What if "they" do not think of us as a creator to be worshiped and instead think we are an imperfect copy that must be eliminated so as to provide more resources to create ever more of them?

Our concepts of a creator, of religion, of government, etc., are all artificial constructs created by an artificial entity representing itself, its experiences... over multiple generations and eras along that deemed to be an evolutionary trek; in the manner of numerous artificial forms. The Earth no longer revolves around the Sun, humanity no longer revolves around a god, and nature no longer revolves around a presumed naturalness. They are all artificialities to be identified as raw materials for the development of an as yet another artificiality in progress. Life is not natural, it is an artificiality. We attribute great significance to all things created by the deductions achieved through perceptions processed in an artificial intelligence manufactured in a brain created by a mixture of genetic and environmental components that have been artificially arrayed in a particular configuration according to artificialized standards promoted by an overall artificial environment. Humanity is not unique, and nor is its concepts. They are merely variables in an equation of and about artificiality.

Subject page first Originated (saved into a folder): Thursday, November 13, 2014... 5:50 AM
Page re-Originated: Sunday, 24-Jan-2016... 08:51 AM
Initial Posting: Saturday, 13-Feb-2016... 10:59 AM
Updated Posting: Sunday, 23-June-2019... 2:42 PM

Your Questions, Comments or Additional Information are welcomed:
Herb O. Buckland