So I have been trying to wrap my head around this Functional Programming thing. Honestly, I understand what the difference between it and the type of programming (imperative) I do now is. Basically, in functional programming, the function is king. You can apply functions to any set of entities using functions such as map(). You can also pass functions as if they were objects. This is kinda cool, cause you can create new functions on the fly and then hand them to other functions to be mapped to yet still other pieces of data.
Thing is, what I understand in theory is different that knowing how (or where) I could use this to my advantage. I think that this could really be a step in the right direction for AI programming ( as evidenced by the fact that LISP is the language most associated with AI, and it is purely functional), but I don't think it is the final answer.
What I need is a language that is aware of both functional concepts and object orientation. LISP sorta does that, but it's CLOS (Common Lisp Object System) is really out there to me.
Ah well, I guess I should suck it up and learn some more. I am having problems integrating my Neural Network theories with a functional programming approach. (I really think this is the key to creating a viable, Turing Test passing AI ™). To that end, I am going back to the math books.
I should probably note that I have had many debates over the course of the last few weeks about the nature of consciousness, as well as whether or not a computer could be programmed to experience things. While I would like to think that a program could be created to emulate human thought, and perhaps human behavior, I don't know if we would ever know if it were conscious. I don't believe that you can quantify consciousness via behavior.
That said, I have generated some new theories about how it could be done (general purpose AI). I don't want to share those yet, as I still need some time to hammer them down and see what leads in the right direction.
