I don't know what this is. It started out as a "model essay" for a question from the GP Paper 1 mid-year exam, but turned into a monstrosity. The more I worked on it, the more complicated it became, and now it is so bloated in word count it will never pass for an essay at JC2 standard, took so long to write that it far exceeded the 90 minute time limit, and the content is so shaky and convoluted it's probably got more loopholes than 3-ring binder paper. Don't blame me, I only finished the main essay at nearly 0330 this morning and have been cosmetically touching it up over the past hour or so.
The question was: The truth should always be told, whatever the cost. Discuss.
Read for a laugh at crappy sleep-deprived writing, read for a headache if you need an excuse to get rid of some of your about-to-expire Panadols, or don't read. It's up to you. More...
Wednesday, July 11, 2012
"By forgoing an initial singular formula and using relational structures that recognize the rows, columns and diagonals of a boardgame, and making use of several different logic systems — including pure ﬁrst-order, existential and guarded — a tailored formula could be devised from the data gathered from each logic. An added General Game Playing program helped the system learn how to play tactically, learn legal moves and, ultimately, win." excerpt from Computer Watches Humans Play Connect Four, Then Beats Them
I recognize this strategy. I use a very similar strategy to approach GP, especially for the essay Paper 1. It could also perhaps answer why I am having such a hard time convincing the kids to think like I do: I didn't realize it before, but it seems like this is how machines think and not human beings.
At least I know that what I took to be natural intuition can actually be a structured process. It's almost damn near impossible to teach people to be intuitive, but perhaps they'll be more open if they can see it as a process instead. *shoehorns it down kids' throats...