Theorem: General Intelligence Entails Creativity, Assuming - Computational Creativity Research: Towards Creative Machines - page 60

which means a form of intelligence short of God, who is traditionally taken to be
omniscient. The alien beings here imagined by my critic are just gods, and would
likely be called such for instance in a science-fiction story. Inevitably, any number
of additional gymnastic moves will be made, and pressed against me. But I claim to
have articulated a serious case at this point, one suitable as a springboard for future
dialectic. And that, I think, for now, is enough.
Acknowledgments I'm deeply grateful for the opportunity to speak in Montpelier at C3GI 2012,
a lecture that marked my pursuit, seemingly a pipe dream then, for a rigorous rationale in favor of
what was then confessedly only an inchoate suspicion: that general intelligence (when both high
and “alien-fair”) entails creativity. I have benefitted from conversations with Naveen Sundar G.,
Matthias Scheutz, and Simon Ellis, and am grateful to them as well. Thanks are due to anonymous
reviewers of the paper, for insightful analysis; and also to Tarek Besold for the same, and first-rate
editorial guidance as well. Finally, the support of AFOSR has been crucial. Needless to say, any
errors appearing herein are mine alone, unrelated to any of the kind minds who have interacted with
me on matters treated herein.
References
1. Anderson, J., Lebiere, C.: The Newell test for a theory of cognition. Behav. Brain Sci. 26 ,
587-640 (2003)
2. Boden, M.: The Creative Mind: Myths and Mechanisms. Basic Books, New York (1991)
3. Bringsjord, S.: Psychometric artificial intelligence. J. Exp. Theor. Artif. Intell. 23 (3), 271-277
(2011)
4. Bringsjord, S., Ferrucci, D.: Artificial Intelligence and Literary Creativity: Inside the Mind of
Brutus, A Storytelling Machine. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah (2000)
5. Bringsjord, S., Ferrucci, D., Bello, P.: Creativity, the turing test, and the (better) lovelace test.
Mind. Mach. 11 , 3-27 (2001)
6. Bringsjord, S., Licato, J.: Psychometric artificial general intelligence: the Piaget-MacGuyver
room. In: Wang, P., Goertzel, B. (eds.) Foundations of Artificial General Intelligence, pp. 25-
47. Atlantis Press, Amsterdam, The Netherlands (2012). http://kryten.mm.rpi.edu/Bringsjord_
Licato_PAGI_071512.pdf . This url is to a preprint only
7. Bringsjord, S., Schimanski, B.: What is artificial intelligence? Psychometric AI as an answer.
In: Proceedings of the 18th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-
03), pp. 887-893. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (2003). http://kryten.mm.rpi.edu/scb.bs.
pai.ijcai03.pdf
8. Ebbinghaus, H.D., Flum, J., Thomas, W.: Mathematical Logic, 2nd edn. Springer, New York
(1994)
9. Feferman, S.: Reflecting on incompleteness. J. Symb. Logic 56 (1), 1-49 (1991)
10. Feferman, S.: Turing in the land of O(Z). In: Herken, R. (ed.) The Universal Turing Machine,
2nd edn. Springer, Secaucus, pp 103-134 (1995)
11. Goodstein, R.: On the restricted ordinal theorem. J. Symb. Logic 9 (31), 33-41 (1944)
12. Hutter, M.: Universal Artificial Intelligence: Sequential Decisions Based on Algorithmic Prob-
ability. Springer, New York (2005)
13. Kirby, L., Paris, J.: Accessible independence results for peano arithmetic. Bull. Lond. Math.
Soc. 14 , 285-293 (1982)
14. Potter, M.: Set Theory and its Philosophy: A Critical Introduction. Oxford University Press,
Oxford (2004)
15. Raven, J.C.: Advanced Progressive Matrices Set II. H. K. Lewis, London (1962). Distributed
in the United States by The Psychological Corporation Inc., San Antonio, Texas