And when our assumptions turn out to be wrong, should we continue working on it even though we know it can never work? The problem is every new term is forged with assumptions because the very idea of what intelligence is the subject of ongoing debate. (I don't even like the one presented here, even though it's pretty good as far as these things go.)
I sympathize though, the nomenclature is polluted with the corpses of would-be giants and makes it hard to talk about what we can all easily recognize as the same broad-strokes effort.
And when our assumptions turn out to be wrong, should we continue working on it even though we know it can never work? The problem is every new term is forged with assumptions because the very idea of what intelligence is the subject of ongoing debate. (I don't even like the one presented here, even though it's pretty good as far as these things go.)
I sympathize though, the nomenclature is polluted with the corpses of would-be giants and makes it hard to talk about what we can all easily recognize as the same broad-strokes effort.