> Answer from Luc Claeys to the question of Hans-Cees Speel :
>
>> I do not see how you can say that the knowledge beings can be
>> conscious...
>
>
> One of the reasons why I consider "knowledge" as a "being"
> originates from my attempts to represent knowledge in
> advanced information processing systems.
I know therefore I am?
>
> Representation of knowledge in an advanced system.
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> An advanced knowledge based system should learn from its actions.
> For example: each time an attempt is made to apply a specific
> element of knowledge, the results from this attempt should be
> correlated later with the conditions in which the attempt was
> made.
> To accomplish this, each element of knowledge must have some
> memory and processing resources (and the ability to decide to
> use its processing resources `after' being used).
> I will call this combination of knowledge, processing and memory
> resources a "knowledge object".
>
> The allocation of resources (memory, processing power, etc,.)
> must be regulated in a distributed way by appreciation exchanged
> between knowledge elements and between the system and the
> external world.
>
> The goal is to refine and complement the knowledge objects by
> learning from the attempts to apply the knowledge.
> To accomplish this, the knowledge object must at least be
> informed of the attempts to apply the knowledge, or better,
> in stead of applying the knowledge as a data pattern,
> the object can be requested to apply itself on a given
> spot in a context.
> Because the knowledge element has some processing resources,
> it has the power to follow-up its own actions and the
> consequences of its actions (appreciation by other subsystems).
> To learn from that, it can correlate the consequences with the
> memorized conditions in which the knowledge was applied.
>
> Knowledge represented in such way acts as an entity, which goal
> is to apply itself in a way which is appreciated positively by
> the environment.
> To evolve towards that goal, the knowledge element develops an
> image of the world in which it can express (apply) itself, an
> image of itself in that world, together with experience to
> anticipate the success or failure of its actions.
>
> That is how I see knowledge in our mind as well.
> That image is one of the reasons why I consider a knowledge
> object as a conscious being.
>
Here we go with word games again. Your definition of consciousness is,
of course, unchalangable, since no one can define consciousness anyway.
It is, however, distinctly different from commonly uses of the word and
almost unrelated. If we were to accept this dilution of meaning, the word
would soon become useless.
> I hope this sheds new light on knowledge and AI systems.
>
No, it simply confuses the issue to me.
Best wishes, Don Mikulecky