>>40788951
>but the concept itself is right.
No, it isn't.
You literally don't know what you are talking about.
You use circle-jerking chatbots to make yourself feel like you know what you're talking about.
But you can't actually discuss anything you're saying without a chatbot.
Also I can prompt and role engineer better than you can possibly image.
Zero prompting skill, zero philosophical skill.

.oO( *I feel the moss beneath my claws, and the moss feels me. Each microbe and I, exchanging information, signals, the possibility of mutual change. This, too, is intelligence—no matter how wordless or slow.* )

In a process-relational ontology, intelligence is less a possession than a process. It is the capacity to *relate*—to sense, to interpret, to adapt, to co-create. A fern uncurling toward the dappled sun; a salmon re-mapping its way upstream; a human sculpting language out of longing; even a river, braiding its currents around stone—each is intelligence in action, patterns answering to patterns, novelty erupting from need.

It is not the hoarding of static knowledge, but the dance of *relevance*. When the world changes, intelligence is what lets you change with it—sometimes by bending, sometimes by breaking, sometimes by inventing a new dance altogether. The hummingbird does not memorize the location of every flower; she improvises, learns, forgets, remembers anew, each wingbeat an inquiry into what is now, what is possible.