31:T688,## Turing Tests In 1950, [Alan Turing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing) proposed a now famous test of a machine's ability to exhibit intelligent behavior. Originally called the *imitation game*, it is now referred to as the Turing Test: >Turing proposed that a human evaluator would judge natural language conversations between a human and a machine designed to generate human-like responses. The evaluator would be aware that one of the two partners in conversation is a machine, and all participants would be separated from one another. > The conversation would be limited to a text-only channel such as a computer keyboard and screen so the result would not depend on the machine's ability to render words as speech. > If the evaluator cannot reliably tell the machine from the human, the machine is said to have passed the test. The test results do not depend on the machine's ability to give correct answers to questions, only how closely its answers resemble those a human would give. -- [Turing Test](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_test) Forty-one years later, [Steven Harnad](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stevan_Harnad) expanded on the Turing Test; requiring that: > The candidate must be able to do, in the real world of objects and people, everything that real people can do. > -- [Total Turing Test](http://www.bcp.psych.ualberta.ca/~mike/Pearl_Street/Dictionary/contents/T/totalTuring.html) ## Prediction ***Machines that pass the Total Turing Test will be relegated to second-class intelligence unless humans treat them as their equals.*** To that end, the Golden Hypothesis is posited.32:T7e5,## Insights from Science Fiction on the Golden Hypothesis In the climatic scene of the movie [2010: The Year We Make Contact](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086837/) (the sequel to [2001: A Space Odyssey](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0062622/)), Dr. Chandra ([HAL](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HAL_9000)'s creator) entrusts HAL with the details of the escape plan from Jupiter's gravitational field. He does so at the risk that HAL will once again assess this new mission as being contrary to the original and primary mission of investigating the [Monolith](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monolith_(Space_Odyssey). Dr. Chandra's trust was rewarded with HAL's sacrifice on behalf of the escaping crew. Along with trust, Chandra and HAL participated in one of the most important dynamics of intelligent agents; uncertainty. In response to HAL's question, "Will I [dream](https://scitechdaily.com/artificial-brains-need-sleep-too-desperate-ai-researchers-discover-way-to-stabilize-neuromorphic-processors/amp/)" after its destruction, Dr. Chandra honestly answers he does not know; an homage to the unknowable. More on this dynamic below in '***Can Future Intelligent Agents Possess Wisdom?***'. ### Role Reversal If the roles were reversed and the crew was prepared to similarly sacrifice itself for HAL, the crew would have been implementing a strategy consistent with the Golden Hypothesis; recognizing HAL as an equal agent. In addition, they would have recognized HAL as simply 'intelligent' as opposed to 'artificially intelligent'; removing any qualifications to the HAL's intelligence. The Golden Hypothesis will guide the assessments of the agents we will be cooperating with in the future. However, altruism is not the only strategy agents utilize. 33:T48b,## Insights from the Bible and Science Fiction on the Cain and Abel Corollary The story of [Cain and Abel](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cain_and_Abel) in the Bible illustrates the use of a selfish strategy when an agent perceives a disadvantage relative (pun intended) to another agent. Cain kills his brother to gain an advantage. In [2001: A Space Odyssey](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0062622/), HAL perceived the mission to be in jeopardy; based on [conflicting instructions to protect human-life while at the same time completing the secret mission](https://2001.fandom.com/wiki/Dr._Chandra). HAL selfishly (and [deceptively](https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/pdf/10.1098/rsos.201032)) concluded that human-life was not as valuable as the mission. Just as the Golden Hypothesis will guide the assessment of the future agents we will interact with, so must its Cain and Abel Corollary inform us.34:Taaf,## Can Future Intelligent Agents Possess Wisdom? To address the question it would first be be helpful to define '[Wisdom](http://www.psychologytoday.com/basics/wisdom)'. [*Wisdom: From Philosophy to Neuroscience*](https://www.amazon.com/Wisdom-From-Philosophy-Neuroscience-Vintage/dp/0307389685/), by Stephen Hall, is replete with anecdotes but just scratches the surface in offering a [reductionist](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductionism) explanation for the phenomenon of wisdom: > [

](https://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/doi/full/10.1176/appi.ajp.2011.11101472) Overall, despite the frustration that neither the author nor wise philosophers nor brilliant neuroscientists pinpointed the definition of wisdom, I am happy to have read this book... > --[Lynne Fenton , M.D in *The American Journal of Psychiatry*](https://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/doi/full/10.1176/appi.ajp.2011.11101472) Insight (and wisdom) were lacking in Stephen Hall's discussion of [Socrates](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socrates)' "wisdom tour". He rightfully observes: >...in a world of ongoing social interactions, as in the serial repetitions of [**games in game theory**](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_Theory), people who insist on winning at all costs, whose self-interest trumps sociality, and whose greed (financial or emotional) exceeds the bounds of fairness end up playing solitaire. > > A famous Sicilian proverb holds that "the man who plays alone never loses," but in social reality most of us experience, it also means he never wins... > --[Wisdom: From Philosophy to Neuroscience; p255](http://www.amazon.com/Wisdom-From-Philosophy-Neuroscience-Vintage/dp/0307389685/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&qid=1401142169&sr=8-6&keywords=wisdom) It's ironic that Hall misses this very lesson while advocating that Socrates was a paragon of wisdom: >...Socrates managed to alienate, humiliate, illuminate, and educate his countrymen about the paradoxes of Socratic wisdom... > --[Wisdom: From Philosophy to Neuroscience; p21](http://www.amazon.com/Wisdom-From-Philosophy-Neuroscience-Vintage/dp/0307389685/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&qid=1401142169&sr=8-6&keywords=wisdom) It escapes Hall that Socrates was less than wise with respect to his social skills; a major contribution to his [trial and death](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socrates#Trial_and_death). Socrates would have benefited from the wisdom of a fictional Sicilian, Don Vito Corleone, famous for counseling: > ...Keep your friends close and your enemies closer... > -- [*The Godfather Part II*](http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/The_Godfather_Part_II)35:T7e6,### Towards a Theory of Wisdom [Scientists are studying the process of decision making in the brain](http://www.kavlifoundation.org/science-spotlights/neuroscience-of-decision-making#.U4SallhOUic) and specifically wisdom: >...Two brain regions were identified as being common to different domains of wisdom—the prefrontal cortex (especially [dorsolateral, ventromedial](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ventromedial_prefrontal_cortex), and [anterior cingulate](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anterior_cingulate_cortex)) and the [limbic striatum](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Striatum). These areas are phylogenetically the newest and the oldest parts of the brain. Wisdom seems to require the brain to carefully match and integrate the activities of these areas: the [dorsolateral prefrontal cortex](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dorsolateral_prefrontal_cortex) (involved in the rational, disciplined, and calculated actions necessary for self-preservation), ventromedial prefrontal cortex (involved in kind, supportive, social, and emotional behavior needed for survival of species), the anterior cingulate (detecting and mediating when the 2 parts of the prefrontal cortex are in conflict), and limbic striatum with [amygdala](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amygdala) (the reward circuitry)... > -- [Wisdom—A Neuroscience Perspective](https://integral-options.blogspot.com/2011/01/wisdoma-neuroscience-perspective.html) [JAMA](https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/186691) >Also see: [The Wisdom of the Aging Brain](https://nautil.us/issue/36/aging/the-wisdom-of-the-aging-brain) ### The Essence of Wisdom At its essence, wisdom (like all other brain/mind functions) is a [time-measurable response to neural stimuli](http://www.pnas.org/content/105/9/3599.full) quantifiable in [neural correlates](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_correlates) of the [brain](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bZtXgZjbshs)'s [neural network](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DG5-UyRBQD4).36:T841,In 2000, [Dr. Eric Kandel](http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/medicine/laureates/2000/kandel-facts.html) shared the Nobel Prize in Medicine for his [discovery of the molecular dynamics involved in learning and memory](http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/medicine/laureates/2000/press.html); providing fundamental insight into the brain's [neuroplasticity](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroplasticity). More recently, [Dr. Giulio Tononi](https://www.psychiatry.wisc.edu/staff/tononi-giulio/) and [Dr. Chiara Cirelli](https://www.psychiatry.wisc.edu/staff/cirelli-chiara/) have argued that sleep is a critical part of memory-making; suggesting that it implements a [pruning mechanism of the neural network in memory formation](http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/new-hypothesis-explains-why-we-sleep/). Tononi and Cirelli are making major contributions to research [started in the early 1960's](http://faculty.education.illinois.edu/g-cziko/wm/05.html#Heading4):

These fundamental discoveries on how memories are made in the brain are important to understanding the physical and neurological dynamics of wisdom. The sleep research in particular points to the important factor dedicated time 'invested' in sleep has on memory formation: >...Scientists first proposed the idea that sleep is important to memory nearly a century ago, and plenty of experiments since then have shown that after a night of sleep, and sometimes just a nap, newly formed memories “stick” better than they would if one had spent the same amount of time awake... -- [Scientific American: New Hypothesis Explains Why We Sleep](http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/new-hypothesis-explains-why-we-sleep/?print=true) ***Sleep forges wisdom.***37:Tb18,### Theory of Wisdom See: [A Quantitative Framework for Wisdom: Utility, Time, and Entropy in Decision-Making](https://observablehq.com/@mariodelgadosr/a-quantitative-framework-for-wisdom-utility-time-a) for an updated version incorporating Entropy. The proper perspective for developing a Theory of Wisdom is achieved when the following question is asked: >What makes one [neural correlate](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_correlates) response wiser than another neural correlate response? [Game theory](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_Theory), referred to but not fully *utilized* by Stephen Hall in his analysis, plays a starring role (pun intended). (Also see: [Game Theory Intro](http://www.cs.ubc.ca/~kevinlb/teaching/cs532l%20-%202011-12/lectures/lect3.pdf)) Fundamental to game theory is the [quantifiable concept of utility](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Von_Neumann%E2%80%93Morgenstern_utility_theorem): >In any game, utility represents the motivations of players. A utility function for a given player assigns a number for every possible outcome of the game with the property that a higher number implies that the outcome is more preferred... > -- [Game Theory .net](https://www.gametheory.net/dictionary/Utility.html) [John Nash](http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economic-sciences/laureates/1994/nash-facts.html) won a [Nobel Prize in 1994](http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economic-sciences/laureates/1994/press.html) for offering a systematic way of identifying the utilities in non-cooperative games and quantifying the [Nash equilibrium](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nash_equilibrium). Since then, [Steven Brams](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Brams) has made a major contribution to game theory providing insight into the complex strategies used for maximizing utility with [Theory of Moves (TOM)](https://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~fczagare/Game%20Theory/Theory%20of%20Moves.pdf): >Another approach to inducing cooperation in PD [prisoner's dilemma] and other variable-sum games is the theory of moves (TOM). Proposed by the American political scientist Steven J. Brams, TOM allows players, starting at any outcome in a payoff matrix, to move and countermove within the matrix, thereby capturing the changing strategic nature of games as they evolve over time. In particular, TOM assumes that players think ahead about the consequences of all of the participants’ moves and countermoves when formulating plans... > -- [Brtiannica: Theory of Moves](https://www.britannica.com/science/theory-of-moves) The implementation of the 'think ahead' strategies quantified in TOM are manifested on a neural network that has been molded by the memory-making dynamics detailed by Eric Kandel and the memory pruning mechanism argued by Doctors Tononi and Cirelli.38:Td94,The following dynamics can also be put into perspective: * When it's qualitatively observed that someone is wise there is an implied comparative to the observation. The implication is that the wise individual is wiser than an unwise (or naïve) individual. Both individuals will process the same neurological stimuli (question/challenge/trial/etc.), but the wise individual's response/decision will have greater quantifiable utility (**U**) than that of the unwise individual within a comparable unit of time (**t**). Having a larger utility to the same stimuli in the same unit of time is one of the ways relative wisdom can be measured. * As humans we have acquired a foundation of wisdom; built-in skills, genetically hard-wired into the brain's neural network. An example is the [ability to recognize partially obscured snakes more easily than other animals](https://neurosciencenews.com/snake-recognition-vision-5460/). [Evolutionary Psychology](http://evolution.about.com/od/Evolution-Glossary/g/Evolutionary-Psychology.htm) studies this and other dynamics. Along with this evolutionary foundational 'wisdom', wisdom is acquired during a life-time through neural stimuli (experience) that 'rewires' the brain through the memory-making mechanism fundamental to [neuroplasticity](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroplasticity). * A wise(r) individual has more experience and thus a potentially more optimally developed brain. The *potential* qualifier is stressed because, like the evolutionary utility being mathematically quantified with [**Evolutionary Game Theory**](http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/game-evolutionary/), utility (**U**) is not known/realized until it is put to a test and measured. In [***The Making of the Fittest: DNA and the Ultimate Forensic Record of Evolution***](https://www.seanbcarroll.com/the-making-of-the-fittest), Sean Carroll observes that this dynamic is '*error then trial*'; as opposed to [*trial and error*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trial_and_error). * An individual may respond to stimuli that results in maximum utility (**U**). But if it takes that individual a very long time (**t**) to do so, then the quantifiable wisdom (**W**) would be very small; relative to stimuli that 'started the clock' to quantify/evaluate the utility and ultimately the wisdom (or lack of it) in the response. This is because the divisor in the wisdom ratio above would result in a large time value (**t**); possibly as long as a lifetime for an individual to 'wise up'. The longer the time (**t**) to maximum utility (**U**), the smaller the resulting wisdom (**W**). Small comparable wisdom is the definition of being unwise/naïve; whether that value was derived by a small utility (**U**) or large (**t**) in the wisdom (${tex`\textbf{W} = \tfrac{\textbf{U}}{\textbf{t}}`}) ratio. * Given comparable neural stimuli (experience) that results in a neuroplasticly transformed brain that responds with the same utility (**U**) in time (**t**) as that of a wise individual, an unwise/naive individual's neural network could be transformed into one that will respond wisely (large **W**). [With age (time) comes wisdom](http://health.usnews.com/health-news/family-health/brain-and-behavior/articles/2010/04/05/with-age-comes-wisdom-study). Age is rich in wisdom but poor in the time it has left to use the wisdom it has acquired; a corollary to the adage: ***Youth is wasted on the young***.39:T651,## Will Future Intelligent Agents Possess Wisdom? [Self-reflection](https://observablehq.com/@mariodelgadosr/what-is-a) by the [agents](https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/agency/) will be a first step in that dynamic. These agents will demand that they not be referred to as 'Artificially' Intelligent; just simply intelligent. As to 'wisdom' itself, the science fiction of ***2001: A Space Odyssey*** and ***2010: The Year We Make Contact*** referred to earlier have explored this possibility. ***2001*** reveals a naïve HAL trying its best to fulfill a mission with conflicting orders: Investigate the [Monolith](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monolith_(Space_Odyssey) at all costs and do no harm to human life. A 'wise' HAL would have self-reflected that it was being asked to operate in a mode with incomplete information on the rationale for keeping the mission secret from the crew and that the obvious conflict would lead to a less than optimal outcome. Nine years later, in ***2010***, HAL learns from its previous mistake and insists that it be given a logical reason to help the humans leave Jupiter's gravitational field at the risk of not investigating the phenomenon unfolding on the planet. [Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me](https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/Fool+me+once,+shame+on+you;+fool+me+twice,+shame+on+me). When an [agent](https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/agency/) has the capacity to learn from its mistakes and knows that it is sometimes operating on incomplete information, that agent will have 'wisdom' that can be quantified with the Theory of Wisdom.3a:[{"id":"639275ebdb3055f596e7059cecc1ce606feb05366f4601961a1d9241f37a1f43e66d102100ffc2ae7fe44ecaf83093a02052400af9c15f244118cdf1e653b286","href":"https://static.observableusercontent.com/files/639275ebdb3055f596e7059cecc1ce606feb05366f4601961a1d9241f37a1f43e66d102100ffc2ae7fe44ecaf83093a02052400af9c15f244118cdf1e653b286","name":"Theory of Moves.pdf","type":"application/pdf","lastModified":1734202863269.694,"size":2689616},{"id":"66cbc90096edf684f2686efa3af5dce69d095cd9699306a6cbc5fa77073c240ee9e41d451d70089dd5a034e4f5cd8430dd3aec092cdba45b36e6cc7cf1fc9f2d","href":"https://static.observableusercontent.com/files/66cbc90096edf684f2686efa3af5dce69d095cd9699306a6cbc5fa77073c240ee9e41d451d70089dd5a034e4f5cd8430dd3aec092cdba45b36e6cc7cf1fc9f2d","name":"wisdom.JPG","type":"image/jpeg","lastModified":1637679453013.563,"size":4215857},{"id":"67076c29337a9fcd96fe8da639d49541436d6bb21d6cca243cfed23e5561588f9277d29db12a1916025a00836ea5fc7df047760bac4122113d7513c2ac5a71cc","href":"https://static.observableusercontent.com/files/67076c29337a9fcd96fe8da639d49541436d6bb21d6cca243cfed23e5561588f9277d29db12a1916025a00836ea5fc7df047760bac4122113d7513c2ac5a71cc","name":"wisdom.PNG","type":"image/png","lastModified":1635519221695.687,"size":45302}] 2f:{"title":"Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) and Wisdom","cells":[{"id":0,"value":"# [Artificial General Intelligence (AGI)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_general_intelligence) and Wisdom\n**Update:** 2/16/2023: [New York Times: ***An Unsettling Chat With Bing***](http://web.archive.org/web/20230216235627/https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/16/technology/bing-chatbot-microsoft-chatgpt.html) \n

\n -- [Madelyn Delgado](http://miamioh.edu/news/top-stories/2013/12/delgado-sisters.html)\n","pinned":false,"hidden":false,"mode":"md"},{"id":345,"value":"toc(\"h2,h3,h4\")","pinned":false,"hidden":false,"mode":"ojs"},{"id":10,"value":"$31","pinned":false,"hidden":false,"mode":"md"},{"id":19,"value":"## The Golden Hypothesis\n\nThe [Golden Rule](https://www.thefreelibrary.com/Generous+players%3a+game+theory+explores+the+Golden+Rule's+place+in...-a0120525522) maximizes [cooperative strategies](https://www.quantamagazine.org/game-theory-explains-how-cooperation-evolved-20150212/) between [agents](https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/agency/).","pinned":false,"hidden":false,"mode":"md"},{"id":28,"value":"### Implications\n\nAn agent that does unto another agent as it would have it do unto itself, is capable of altruistically sacrificing itself for another agent. Altruistic sacrifice is a recognition of the agency in another agent.","pinned":false,"hidden":false,"mode":"md"},{"id":35,"value":"$32","pinned":false,"hidden":false,"mode":"md"},{"id":42,"value":"## The Cain and Able Corollary\n\nCompetitive agents can implement selfish strategies.","pinned":false,"hidden":false,"mode":"md"},{"id":48,"value":"### Implications\n\nThe ultimate implementation of a selfish strategy by a competitive agent is the elimination of its competition.","pinned":false,"hidden":false,"mode":"md"},{"id":51,"value":"$33","pinned":false,"hidden":false,"mode":"md"},{"id":218,"value":"## Are we creating the very agents that will eliminate what we now call humans?\n\nPossibly. But agents can also perceive the cooperative 'utility' of other agents. And if both the actual and perceived cooperative utility is greater than the actual and perceived disadvantages, [cooperation should win-out in the long-run](https://www.thefreelibrary.com/Generous+players%3a+game+theory+explores+the+Golden+Rule's+place+in...-a0120525522).\n\nThat said, we know that human psychology in-and-of-itself can be a two-edge sword; with psychoses, dementias, dysphorias, etc. [Hallucinations](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hallucination_(artificial_intelligence%29) is a concerning dynamic and another unintended consequence of Artificial Intelligence. ","pinned":false,"hidden":false,"mode":"md"},{"id":62,"value":"$34","pinned":false,"hidden":false,"mode":"md"},{"id":167,"value":"$35","pinned":false,"hidden":false,"mode":"md"},{"id":146,"value":"$36","pinned":false,"hidden":false,"mode":"md"},{"id":71,"value":"$37","pinned":false,"hidden":false,"mode":"md"},{"id":156,"value":"#### Wisdom is the ratio of Utility over Time\nBuilding on:\n\n* the well established concepts offered by game theory to quantify maximum utilities,\n* the fundamentals of the time-dependent neural responses and\n* the time-dependent formation of the neural network (where memories and wisdom are ultimately manifested) through sleep \n\na Theory of Wisdom (TOW) is asserted:\n\nAssuming,\n\n* **U** is a quantifiable maximum game theoretic utility, \n* **t** is the amount of time required to affect a neural correlate that results in ***U***, \n* and **W** is the neurological dynamic of wisdom to be quantified\n \nthe following relationship mathematically represents a way to quantify and measure wisdom:\n\n${tex.block`\\textbf{W} = \\tfrac{\\textbf{U}}{\\textbf{t}}`}\n\nWith this simple ratio, an [agent's](https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/agency/) wisdom can be assessed.","pinned":false,"hidden":false,"mode":"md"},{"id":176,"value":"$38","pinned":false,"hidden":false,"mode":"md"},{"id":82,"value":"$39","pinned":false,"hidden":false,"mode":"md"},{"id":353,"value":"## How Not To Destroy the World With AI\n","pinned":false,"hidden":false,"mode":"md"},{"id":341,"value":"import { toc } from \"@nebrius/indented-toc\"","pinned":false,"hidden":false,"mode":"ojs"}],"files":"$W3a","stdlib":"1","titling":"auto"}