yes! this is an important point. I don’t quite know how to cash it out yet but I suspect I will eventually converge towards viewing concepts as “agents” which are trying to explain as much sensory data as possible while also cooperating/competing with each other.
I suspect I will eventually converge towards viewing concepts as “agents”
What is an “agent” in your ontology?
In one convo (at ILIAD 1), you named situational awareness as the criterion for distinguishing a part of an agent as a subagent. Is this also an important factor for calling something an “agent” simpliciter?
yes! this is an important point. I don’t quite know how to cash it out yet but I suspect I will eventually converge towards viewing concepts as “agents” which are trying to explain as much sensory data as possible while also cooperating/competing with each other.
What is an “agent” in your ontology?
In one convo (at ILIAD 1), you named situational awareness as the criterion for distinguishing a part of an agent as a subagent. Is this also an important factor for calling something an “agent” simpliciter?