anti-rules

Antinomy of Rules

There are absolutely no existing rules to choose rules logically. If there were an independent rule to choose rules, this rule would be combined or merged with the rules available to be chosen to form a new rule. So we can conclude:

We can never make a program to choose other programs, so AI can not be fully programmed.

What we can do to our material world is to combine a rule with other rules to make a new rule or program. This way allows us to make more and better programs to be chosen, however many many things in our life can not be fully programmed. AI should be designed to deal with those things that have not been programmed yet or things unprogrammable including “to choose rules”.

Anything without intelligence can never have the ability to choose rules, or anything that can is a life or AL with intelligence. Only high lives have the ability to choose rules with an instinct judgment or fuzzy values instead of a precise rule.

An automation system of non-life or non-AL can not have more than one rules in any case. What we can do to it is to give it a better program.

This system may change the data part of the rule, but this behavior is included in the rule that allows the system to change it within the function of the rule.

Humans often have to make choices in life experience. We do not have any precise rules to choose rules in general. Humans and other high lives often use instinct or values to do it. Instinct or value system is neither a rule nor a program. Instinct and values are inner drives to orient thinking and behaviors.

To choose rules needs intelligence, but to execute rules does not need intelligence. Thinking and reasoning is not an execution of rules, instead, it is trying to choose rules or choose rules to make a new rule.

To choose rules is something fuzzy, but rules themselves are precise.

To find rules, to change rules and to make rules are the same as to choose rules in principle, because they include the necessity to choose rules.

A rule that is able to change itself is feasible, but it is also in the antinomy of rules if it needs to find other rules to change itself. The function or manifestation of a rule can change. A computer virus can change the function of itself, but the change is included in the rule or program.
Any rules are the same as their opposite rules, the difference is what we describe it in two opposite ways. A rule that has a concrete relation to other rules forms a new rule together with the involved rules. The relation is logic gates in computer systems.

Back

Home

We can never make a program to choose other programs, so AI can not be fully programmed.

Anything without intelligence can never have the ability to choose rules, or anything that can is a life or AL with intelligence. Only high lives have the ability to choose rules with an instinct judgment or fuzzy values instead of a precise rule.

An automation system of non-life or non-AL can not have more than one rules in any case. What we can do to it is to give it a better program.

This system may change the data part of the rule, but this behavior is included in the rule that allows the system to change it within the function of the rule.

To choose rules needs intelligence, but to execute rules does not need intelligence. Thinking and reasoning is not an execution of rules, instead, it is trying to choose rules or choose rules to make a new rule.

To choose rules is something fuzzy, but rules themselves are precise.

To find rules, to change rules and to make rules are the same as to choose rules in principle, because they include the necessity to choose rules.

A rule that is able to change itself is feasible, but it is also in the antinomy of rules if it needs to find other rules to change itself. The function or manifestation of a rule can change. A computer virus can change the function of itself, but the change is included in the rule or program.