do you think it is clear there is something more like Turing-complete webs of strategy within subagents vs merely pseudostrategy ?
I don’t know. As suggested by this post, I move pretty freely between the subagent framing and the “associative belief structure” framing as seems appropriate to the situation. To me agentness doesn’t necessarily require the agents to be particularly strategic. (A thermostat is technically an agent, but not a very strategic one.)
IFS calls subagents just “parts”, which I prefer in some contexts; it has fewer connotations of being particularly strategic.
I don’t know. As suggested by this post, I move pretty freely between the subagent framing and the “associative belief structure” framing as seems appropriate to the situation. To me agentness doesn’t necessarily require the agents to be particularly strategic. (A thermostat is technically an agent, but not a very strategic one.)
IFS calls subagents just “parts”, which I prefer in some contexts; it has fewer connotations of being particularly strategic.