Re: BEYOND LOGIC: [was How the best people reason/beyond the limits of the human brain]

I think this discussion is bound to fail from the very onset of any
research into this subject.

I will make an attempt to try to explain why.

First of all all specimens of homo sapiens are not born equal, genetically.
I am referring to genetic variations in genes and groups of genes that
affect the structure and functioning at the level of neural cells, sensory
perception and cognitive skills.
We currently label these variations under the umbrella term of
"neurodivergence".
This already creates two distinct groups of human research subjects.

Then there are some issues we can categorize as part of the"nature versus
nurture" discussion, which also touches upon the phenotype versus genotype
debate.

Tertio,  it has been widely studied and documented in literature that
reasoning, or more succinctly thought processes can be influenced by
external factors in both positive and negative ways, e.g. through sound,
light, smell, temperature, audiovisual stimuli and external environment and
ambience factors.

And in the fourth place rational thought doesn't follow straight lines or
fixed patterns.
Our language is full of concepts indicating such: Eureka moments, out of
the box thinking,  aha erlebnis, deja vu, foresight, hindsight, gut
feeling,  intuition, lateral thinking and the one that has sprouted an
entire category of its own-brainstorming.

Taking all of these into account and factoring in all the ones omitted,
the label "best people" defies definition and cannot be found in a way that
allows for objective study.

What Dave Raggett hinted at is in essence an issue of norms and values and
thus becomes an issue of ethics.

On Tue, Feb 17, 2026, 13:34 Paola Di Maio <paola.dimaio@gmail.com> wrote:

> Greetings AI KR CG
>>>
>>
> Following up on a thread exchanged on this list  five years ago, reposted
> below and never properly discussed
>
> This research note
> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1v5_bejXQKaEbZCF8q8Sy7yBIq9ULErGc-ZpOgq7LOLI/edit?usp=sharing> summarizes
> the arguments  and and provides a bibliography
> with the invitation to expand on reasoning modalities
>
> 10.6084/m9.figshare.31356424
>
>
> Paola Di Maio
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>>> On Mon, Feb 8, 2021 at 2:25 PM Paola Di Maio <paoladimaio10@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Picking up on something Dave said in response to the thread. COGAI vs
>>>> AIKR
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Feb 5, 2021 at 11:52 PM Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org> wrote:
>>>>     *If we can successfully reproduce how the best people reason, we
>>>> will be in a strong position to improve on that by going beyond the limits
>>>> of the human brain.  *
>>>>
>>>>   Dave also pointed out that he would consider best people those who
>>>> score well during school exams
>>>>
>>>> There are clear arguments to show that scoring well at exams is often
>>>> the results of good training and many conditions, including physical
>>>> fitness, lifestyle, emotional environment and that furthermore, often the
>>>> best reasoning ability cannot be captured by passing tests
>>>> (in the case of people who can catch a snake, or navigate without
>>>> compass or GPS etc)
>>>> ie, reasoning is not always related to good exam results
>>>>
>>>> But those arguments aside,  I d like to bring up a well known and
>>>> documented example of a woman who was
>>>> very sick and left for dead.  without going too close to her, for fear
>>>> of fetching a disease, people asked her at some distance
>>>> if she had any dying wish,  any last minute wish  . she left a message
>>>> of farewell to be delivered to her family
>>>> and also requested her urine to be taken into a bottle and handed over
>>>> to the first person who would cross the gate
>>>> at a certain given place.  This was agreed and done
>>>>
>>>> *":So ... I asked them to take my urine in a bottle and give it to
>>>> whomever they met first at the Boudhanath Stupa entrance. By now I was
>>>> semi-conscious, but they were kind enough to do this favor for me. The
>>>> person who took my urine met a man at the gate who turned out to be a
>>>> Tibetan physician. He tested my urine and diagnosed that I had been
>>>> poisoned with meat, prescribed some medicine and even sent me some blessing
>>>> pills. My health improved dramatically and I had many good dreams. .”*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Now, I know this is not your typical reasoning, and we cannot expect
>>>> this from  everyone nor our future AI systems
>>>> but we should keep these examples in mind when considering what is
>>>> possible for an enlightened mind and beyond the ordinary
>>>>
>>>> She is now alive and well and in Kathmandu, if anyone wants to look her
>>>> up sometimes and learn more about beyond ordinary reasoning,
>>>>
>>>> https://nalanda-monastery.eu/index.php/en/teachers-of-nalanda/khadro-la?start=1
>>>>
>>>> PDM
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Feb 5, 2021 at 11:52 PM Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 5 Feb 2021, at 13:11, Paola Di Maio <paoladimaio10@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> an afterthought
>>>>>
>>>>> in respect to mimicking how humans reason and communicate well,
>>>>> each human  is different, we can generalize up to a point
>>>>>
>>>>> and mimicking may result in some kind of parrot engineering ....
>>>>> useful to start with but nowhere near intelligence at its best
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> You’re missing the big picture.  If we can successfully reproduce how
>>>>> the best people reason, we will be in a strong position to improve on that
>>>>> by going beyond the limits of the human brain. The more we understand, the
>>>>> further and faster we can go. This is an evolutionary path that will go
>>>>> very much faster than biological evolution. At the same time we can make AI
>>>>> safe by ensuring that it is transparent, collaborative and embodies the
>>>>> best of human values.
>>>>>
>>>>> Human-like AI will succeed where logic based approaches have
>>>>> struggled. 500 million years of evolution is not to be dismissed so easily.
>>>>>
>>>>> I remember the enthusiastic claims around “5th generation computer
>>>>> systems” and logic programming at the start of the 1980’s, and had plenty
>>>>> of fun with the prolog language. However, the promise of logic programming
>>>>> fizzled out. Today, 40 years on, much of the focus of work on knowledge
>>>>> representation is still closely coupled to the mathematical model of logic,
>>>>> and this is holding us all back. We need to step away and exploit the
>>>>> progress in the cognitive sciences.
>>>>>
>>>>> I am especially impressed by how young children effortlessly learn
>>>>> language, given the complexity of language, and the difficulties that adult
>>>>> learners face when learning second languages. Another amazing opportunity
>>>>> is to understand how some children are so much better than others when it
>>>>> comes to demanding subjects like science and mathematics. Moreover, warm
>>>>> empathic AI will depend on understanding how children acquire social skills.
>>>>>
>>>>> Let’s lift up our eyes to the big picture for human-like AI.
>>>>>
>>>>> Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org> http://www.w3.org/People/Raggett
>>>>> W3C Data Activity Lead & W3C champion for the Web of things
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>

Milton Ponson
Rainbow Warriors Core Foundation
CIAMSD Institute-ICT4D Program
+2977459312
PO Box 1154, Oranjestad
Aruba, Dutch Caribbean