Caledonian2 comments on Recognizing Intelligence - Less Wrong

10 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 07 November 2008 11:22PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (30)

Sort By: Old

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Caledonian2 08 November 2008 04:12:46AM 0 points [-]

It is impossible to determine whether something was well-designed without speculating as to its intended function. Bombs are machines, machines whose function is to fly apart; they generally do not last particularly long when they are used. Does that make them poorly-made?

If the purpose of a collection of gears was to fly apart and transmit force that way, sticking together would be a sign of bad design. Saying that the gears must have been well-designed *because* they stick together is speculating as to their intended function.

I do not see what is gained by labeling blind entropy-increasing processes as 'intelligence', nor do I see any way in which we can magically infer quality design without having criteria by which to judge configurations.