Alright, then it is a semantics debate from my perspective. I don’t think we’re actually disagreeing, now. Your “objective-generators” cleanly map to my “goals”, and your “objectives” to my “local implementations of goals” (or maybe “values” and “local interpretations of values”). That distinction definitely makes sense at the ground level. In my ontology, it’s a distinction between what you want and how achieving it looks like in a given situation.
I think it makes more sense to describe it my way, though, since I suspect a continuum of ever-more-specific/local objectives (“winning” as an environment-independent goal, “winning” in this type of game, “winning” against the specific opponent you have, “winning” given this game and opponent and the tactic they’re using), rather than a dichotomy of “objective-generator” vs “objective”, but that’s a finer point.
Alright, then it is a semantics debate from my perspective. I don’t think we’re actually disagreeing, now. Your “objective-generators” cleanly map to my “goals”, and your “objectives” to my “local implementations of goals” (or maybe “values” and “local interpretations of values”). That distinction definitely makes sense at the ground level. In my ontology, it’s a distinction between what you want and how achieving it looks like in a given situation.
I think it makes more sense to describe it my way, though, since I suspect a continuum of ever-more-specific/local objectives (“winning” as an environment-independent goal, “winning” in this type of game, “winning” against the specific opponent you have, “winning” given this game and opponent and the tactic they’re using), rather than a dichotomy of “objective-generator” vs “objective”, but that’s a finer point.