3. The fundamental approach of Thinknowlogy
Since the origin of life is subject to discussion, the starting point of all research involved with the origin of life depends on the world view of the researcher. So, one's world view also effects the way the field of AI and knowledge technology is researched, in regard to the assumed origin of natural intelligence and natural language:
• Despite centuries of exhaustive research, the theory of evolution still hasn't provided a satisfying explanation for the origin of intelligence and language. Let alone, how both are related. Evolutionists consider the origin of intelligence as one of the biggest mysteries. And regarding to research on the origin of language: “One problem makes the topic difficult to study: the lack of direct evidence” 3;
• According to the biblical world view, God is the creator of life and the universe, including intelligence and language. God has created laws of nature to make his creation run like clockwork – in a unified, structured and deterministic 4 way. All natural phenomena must obey these laws of nature. Therefore, it must be possible to define intelligence in a unifying, fundamental (=natural) and deterministic (=implementable) way. And because the biblical world view assumes that the first human (Adam) was instantly intelligent – and directly able to speak after his creation – intelligence and language might be related. If so, it must be possible to identify (Natural Laws of) Intelligence embedded in Grammar. Besides that, current languages should share a common logic, because according to the bible all languages have a common origin: “At one time all the people of the world spoke the same language and used the same words” (Genesis 11:1). During the building of the tower of Babel, God would have confused the tongues, after which the languages would have diverged: “Come, let’s go down and confuse the people with different languages. Then they won’t be able to understand each other” (Genesis 11:7).
In simple words:
If a creationist wants to make a machine able to fly, he/she will need to investigate the laws of nature involved with aviation / flight. And if a creationist wants a machine able to think, he/she will need to investigate the laws of nature involved with thought / intelligence. Evolutionists will have to find their own way.
The one with the world view nearest to the way nature works, will have the best results.
3 I own a printed copy of the Encyclopædia Britannica, the 1990 edition. On both topics, intelligence and language, it praises the founding fathers of the theory of evolution for their contribution to these topics. But why praising the founding fathers, while their theory can’t explain “one of the biggest mysteries” (intelligence), and while it has “a lack of direct evidence” (regarding to language)?
4 deterministic: “the doctrine that all facts and events exemplify natural laws”.