A fundamental approach to AI and NLP
(marking the downfall of the evolution theory as the assumed origin of intelligence and natural language)
To download this paper:
• A fundamental approach to AI and NLP.pdf (date: 16 August, 2014)
A science is either a cognitive science, or a fundamental science:
• Cognitive sciences study natural behavior, and describe this behavior in behavior models, after which can be predicted where and when a specific behavior will occur;
• Fundamental sciences study natural phenomena, and describe the natural laws according which a specific natural phenomenon occurs, after which can be predicted where and when that natural phenomenon will occur.
More than 160 years ago, George Boole considered intelligence (thoughts) to be a mathematical, logical, fundamental science. In his An Investigation of the Laws of Thought, he described algebra (laws) in grammar.
However, almost 60 years ago, scientists considered the field of AI and knowledge technology to be a cognitive science, which studies the behavior of intelligence and meaning. But they fail to describe this behavior in behavior models. Wouldn't the lack of a definition explain the lack of progress in this field? Can fundamental results be expected when a field has no foundation?
What if George Boole was right? What if the field of AI and knowledge technology is actually a fundamental science? What if naturally occurring intelligence and naturally occurring meaning can be defined in a natural way – based on natural laws – after which can be predicted exactly where and when intelligence and meaning naturally ensues? Wouldn't such a fundamental approach speedup progress in the field of AI and knowledge technology?