Replying to LO30551 --
Thank you Ziva for your comment. While new quality and new connections are
indeed very important, somehow it seems that these things are also
possible through machine-like algorithms (e.g., genetic algorithm,
cellular automata, etc.)! You may very well be right that knowledge could
not be without human, but given the evidence so far, and our definitions
of knowledge, one is not very sure!
Humans themselves, in most part, are products of algorithmic steps,
working through biochemical networks to social networks. Of course, these
are complex algorithms -- relevant to self-producing networks. One might
claim that mind is not algorithmic (following Penrose for instance), but
you see, it is not a settled matter yet, for most. There is overwhelming
evidence that mind emerged in the physical universe (through the emergence
of life).
There is another meaning to what you are saying, perhaps. Knowledge, like
money, has little value itself except when we exchange it with others --
i.e., by connecting, by acquiring new quality, etc.
Therefore, instead of focusing too much on how knowledge arises, perhaps
we should be looking at how knowledge moves -- between users, exchange
participants, communities, or systems.
DP
India
>We are surrounding with data - facts, words, books, electronic medias.
>If we could use this data for making decision, it becomes information.
>Where we on this base make a new quality, new connection, it becomes
>knowledge.
>I personally think (maybe I am wrong) that machines could only work
>based on algorithm, which is defined in advance, with human knowledge.
>So I think that knowledge could not be without human.
--Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <Richard@Karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>
"Learning-org" and the format of our message identifiers (LO1234, etc.) are trademarks of Richard Karash.