After having read a number of reviews of my book "Is Intelligence an Algorithm?", I feel the need to further clarify my stance on this question.
Background
The title of the book is a question, not an affirmative statement. If some of my readers conclude that intelligence is an algorithm, they have misunderstood my book and in particular chapter 11, where I show that intelligence does not always follow an algorithm, in particular when it comes to creativity and intuition.
Nature
Although my book makes a strong case of showing that intelligence (the ability to achieve complex goals) often follows a sequence of steps, which -with a bit of goodwill- you could call an algorithm, it should be realised that it was an act of intelligence itself to select or program such an algorithm. Nature has indeed selected an evolutionary screening and pruning protocol, which follows certain rules and which allows for creating ever increasing complexity and integration. Nature can therefore be said to employ an "intelligence algorithm" if you wish. However, there was no precooked algorithm imposed on nature to endow it with intelligence. Somehow Nature was able to compound this evolutionary screening and pruning protocol. This protocol is now part of Nature's intelligence as we know it, but originally it was the product of Nature's intelligence. In other words I do not say that intelligence in Nature IS an algorithm, but rather that Nature employs an algorithm (which Nature evolved itself) to generate complexity. Natural intelligence gave birth to an efficient routine, which it integrated among its arsenal to solve problems.
Humans
Whereas the analytical processes of the intellect namely of (re)cognition, reasoning and problem solving clearly follow pre-defined steps, which one could call algorithmic, we should not forget that we have a collection of such tools at our disposal. To pick the right one at the right time can involve a kind of meta-pattern recognition: To be able to select the pattern, which will solve your problem and this can still be algorithmic. Often however it requires a degree of intuition and creativity, which I have shown cannot captured in terms predefined steps. Like Nature, if we developed this toolset at all, it was our natural intelligence that was able to program these routines to make them an efficient component of our intelligence: It is indeed smart to automatise processes you have to carry out very often, so that you don't have to pay conscious attention to each of the steps of the process every time, which would waste tremendous amount of energy and time. But that does not mean that our intelligence IS an algorithm. Rather, our intelligence favours using algorithms whenever possible.
Artificial Intelligence
Even artificial intelligence sometimes escapes precooked algorithms. Take the neural networks that have been programmed. They should not be confused with biological neural networks that most often employ neurons. Neurons are vastly more versatile and complex than the neural nodes employ in artificial neural networks. Neurons can grow new connections and employ different types of neurotransmitters giving rise to different types of behaviours even within a single neuron.
A neural node in an artificial neural network is not so versatile and normally always performs the same task. It is however the interplay of multiple nodes, which renders the system as a whole a black box. Whereas the individual nodes operate algorithmically, their interplay can hardly be said to be algorithmic. A non-linear and unpredictable behaviour is often observed, which still is capable of getting the desired output.
Conclusion
Whereas it is highly efficient for intelligence (i.e. the ability to achieve complex goals) to employ algorithms, it should be realised that these algorithms were developed, programmed or selected by intelligence itself.
The holistic nature of intuition, whereby a solution to a problem is arrived at once by the whole of the system without following a mechanistic sequence of steps, points to an underlying principle of intelligence, which is not algorithmic. Perhaps intuition finds its basis in neural network like behaviour of neurons or even quantum events at a deeper level of reality. In chapter 11 of my book I go into detail as regards some speculative underlying principles. A priori there is no reason to assume that the complexity and versatility of the interplay of these follow a precooked pattern. Which does not mean that those processes do not involve computation. If computational they escape the rigid structure of a traditional algorithm.
If you like to read my book, you can order it here. You can also purchase a copy before the publication date (26-1-2018) from me directly.
If you liked this post, please upvote and/or resteem.
tip!
join my group on facebook
my group is --"STEEMIT" join and make your DREAM come true
and follow and upvote me on steemit and i will follow you 100%.
beacause a huge group can make a huge amount of money
my link is -- https://steemit.com/@avinashjadon
Spamming posts like this will get you flagged.