Is Individual Intellegence a Myth?

Peter Duke Self Portrait

This post was going to start with “I was thinking”, but then it occurred to me that any “thinking” I might have been doing was simply the significant pondering on the thoughts of others.

The problem that I am trying to solve is to try to put some structured form around the concepts of Knowledge and Scientific Truth. The premise is that as complex systems evolve, the ability to predict outcomes becomes more difficult, because the number of variables grows exponentially.

Assume that Truth (T) is defined as Causal Comprehension, and Knowledge (K) is defined as Correlated Comprehension. In this definition, Truth is not always known and Knowledge is not always true.

A quick conclusion that one might make is that as a system becomes more Complex (C), the ability to discover the Truth becomes more difficult. This can be expressed as T=1/C² (Inverse Square!). That is, the more complicated the system, the smaller percentage of Truth is Casually Comprehensible. (A riff on the old “The more you know, the more you don’t know” argument.)

In this case, a system can reach a point where Individual Intelligence hides behind an event horizon of comprehension. Since causal comprehension is not necessarily required for survival, the crummy solution of Correlated Comprehension, combined with Darwinian Selection is “good enough” to insure evolution; but to get to answers regarding the causal reality of “creation”, for example, may be beyond an individual intelligence to comprehend.

(more later)

Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *