Marvin Minsky "The Emotion Machine": Chapter 8.1-2 "Creative Approach"

8.1 Creative

“Although such a machine could do a lot as well and perhaps better than us, in another it would certainly be untenable, and it would be revealed that it does not act consciously, but only due to the location of its organs.”
- Descartes. Reasoning on the method. 1637

We are used to using machines that are stronger and faster than people. But before the advent of the first computers, no one knew that a machine could do something more than a limited number of different actions. Perhaps that is why Descartes insisted that no machine can be as creative as a human being.
')
“For while the mind is a universal instrument that can serve in a variety of circumstances, the organs of the machine need a special arrangement for each individual action. It is inconceivable from here that there are so many different arrangements in the car, so that it can act in all cases of life in the way our mind makes us act. ” - Descartes. Reasoning on the method. 1637

In the same way it was previously believed that there was an insurmountable gulf between man and animals. In "The Origin of Man," Darwin observes: "Many authors insisted that man is separated by an insurmountable barrier from lower animals in relation to mental abilities . " But then she clarifies that this distinction is “quantitative, not qualitative . ”

Charles Darwin: “It seems to me now fully proved that man and higher animals, especially primates ... have the same feelings, motivations and sensations; everyone has the same passion, affection, and emotion - even the most complex, such as jealousy, suspicion, competition, gratitude and generosity; ... possess, although in varying degrees, the ability to imitate, care, reason and choose; possess memory, imagination, association of ideas and reason. ”

Further, Darwin observes that “individuals of the same species represent all stages, from utter nonsense to great mind,” and argues that even the highest forms of human thought could develop from such variations - because he does not see for this insurmountable obstacles.

“One cannot deny, at least, the possibilities of this development, because every day we see examples of the development of these abilities in each child and could follow a completely gradual transition from the mind of a complete idiot ... to Newton's . ”

Many people still find it difficult to imagine transitional steps from the animal to the human mind. In the past, this view was excusable — few thought that only a few small structural changes could significantly increase the capabilities of machines . However, in 1936, mathematician Alan Turing showed how to create a “universal” machine that can read the instructions of other machines, and then, switching between these instructions, will be able to do everything that these machines can do.

All modern computers use this technique, so today we can arrange a meeting with one device, edit texts or send messages to friends. Moreover, as soon as we keep these instructions inside the machine, the programs can change so that the machine can expand its own capabilities. This proves that the restrictions that Descartes observed were not inherent in machines, but were the result of our old-fashioned ways of building or programming them. For each machine that we designed in the past, there was only one way to perform each specific task, whereas a person, if he is having difficulty solving a problem, has alternative options.

Nevertheless, many thinkers still argue that machines can never reach such heights as composing great theories or symphonies. Instead, they prefer to attribute these skills to inexplicable "talents" or "gifts." However, these abilities will become less mysterious as soon as we see that our resourcefulness could arise from different ways of thinking. Indeed, each previous chapter of this book showed how our mind offers such alternatives:

§one. We are born with many alternatives.
§2. We learn from Imprimers (Impressors) and friends.
§3. We also learn what not to do.
§four. We are capable of reflection.
§five. We can predict the consequences of imaginary actions.
§6. We use a huge stock of common sense knowledge.
§7. We can switch between different ways of thinking.

This chapter discusses additional features that make the human mind so versatile.

§8-2. We look at things from different points of view.
§8-3. We have ways to quickly switch between them.
§8-4. We can learn quickly.
§8-5. We can effectively recognize relevant knowledge.
§8-6. We have different ways of presenting things.

At the beginning of this book, we noted that it was difficult to perceive ourselves as a machine, since no existing machine understands the meaning, but only executes the simplest commands. Some philosophers claim that this is the way it should be, because machines are material, whereas meaning exists in the world of ideas, areas outside the physical world. But in the first chapter we assumed that we ourselves limit the machines, defining the values ​​so narrowly that we cannot express their diversity:

“If you 'understand' something in only one way, you hardly understand it at all - because when something goes wrong, you run into a wall. But if you imagine something in different ways, then there is always a way out. You can look at things from different sides until you find your solution! ”

The following examples show how this diversity makes the human mind so flexible. And we begin with an assessment of the distance to the items.

8.2 Distance Estimation

Do you want a microscope instead of an eye?
But you are not a mosquito and not a microbe.
Why watch us, judge for yourself,
On aphid, neglecting heaven
- A. Pope. Experience about man. (trans. V. Mikushevich)

When you are thirsty, you are looking for something to drink, and if you see a mug next to you, you can just take it, but if the mug is far enough, then you will have to approach it. But how do you know what things you can reach? A naive person does not see any problems here: “You just look at the thing and see where it is . ” But when Joan noticed the approaching car in chapter 4-2 or grabbed the book at 6-1, how did she know the distance to them?

In primitive times, people needed to assess how close a predator was. Today, we need to evaluate unless there is enough time to cross the street - nevertheless, our life depends on it. Fortunately, we have many ways to estimate the distance to objects.

For example, a regular cup the size of a hand. So if the cup fills as much space as your outstretched hand! then you can reach out and take it. You can also estimate how far the chair is from you, since you know its approximate size.

Even if you do not know the size of the object, you can still estimate the distance to it. For example, if one of the two things of the same size looks smaller, then it is further away. Such an assumption may be erroneous if this thing is a model or a toy. If objects overlap each other, regardless of their relative sizes, the one that is in front is closer.



You can also get spatial information about how parts of the surface are illuminated or shaded, as well as the perspective and surroundings of the object. Again, such clues are sometimes misleading; the images of the two blocks below are identical, but the context assumes that they have different sizes.



If you assume that two objects lie on the same surface, then the one that lies above is further away. More fine-grained textures appear farther, like blurred objects.





You can estimate the distance to the object by comparing different images from each of the eyes. By the angle between these images or by the slight "stereoscopic" differences between them.





The closer the object is to you, the faster it moves. You can also estimate the size by how quickly the focus changes.





And finally, apart from all these ways of perception, you can estimate the distance without using sight at all - if you have seen the object before, you remember its location.

Student: why so many methods, if two or three are enough?

Every minute of wakefulness, we make hundreds of distance assessments, and, nevertheless, we almost fall down the stairs or crash into the door. Each of the methods for estimating the distance has its drawbacks. Focusing only works on close objects - some people cannot focus their sight at all. Binocular vision works at great distances, but some cannot match images from each of the eyes. Other methods do not work if the horizon or texture is not visible and blur is not available. Knowledge applies only to familiar objects, but the object may be of an unusual size — nevertheless, we rarely make fatal errors, since we have many ways to estimate the distance.

If each method has its pros and cons, what to trust? In the following chapters we will discuss a few ideas about how we so quickly manage to switch between different ways of thinking.

Thanks for the translation katifa sh . If you want to join and help with translations (write in a personal or email alexey.stacenko@gmail.com)

"The Table of Contents of The Emotion Machine"
Introduction
Chapter 6. COMMON SENSE [ eng ]
Chapter 7. Thinking [ eng ]
Chapter 9. The Self [ eng ]

Ready translations

• "The Art of Doing Science and Engineering" by Richard Hamming
• Full translation of the book about building communities: "Social Architecture"
• "Hackers and Artists." As we all 13 years all rune Paul Graham translated
• Translation of the book “Skunk Works. Personal memoirs of my work in Lockheed "
• Translation of the book Andrew Una Passion for Machine Learning
• Course lectures "Startup". Peter Thiel. Stanford 2012

Current translations to which you can connect

• The Dream Machine: The History of the Computer Revolution.
• Translation of Richard Bartle's book “Designing Virtual Worlds”