The word "smart" is so overloaded with definitions as to be nearly useless in such discussions. I like this set of definitions:
- Intelligence is being able to observe systems [1] and understand how they work. Both Hawking and Machiavelli objectively have this.
- Smartness is being able to use one's understanding of a system [1] to achieve one's own goals. Both Hawking and Machiavelli objectively have this.
- Wisdom is being able to choose the right goals. This is where there is a clear distinction between Hawking and Machiavelli, and since it requires moral judgment to deliberate whom of them chooses "the right goals", this cannot have an objective answer.
By the way, it's easy to see with these systems that existing machines that are supposedly "intelligent" and "smart" are in fact neither.
[1] "System" shall be interpreted in the broadest way possible, i.e. "any network of interconnected actors", e.g. a machine or the financial system or any society of people.
- Intelligence is being able to observe systems [1] and understand how they work. Both Hawking and Machiavelli objectively have this.
- Smartness is being able to use one's understanding of a system [1] to achieve one's own goals. Both Hawking and Machiavelli objectively have this.
- Wisdom is being able to choose the right goals. This is where there is a clear distinction between Hawking and Machiavelli, and since it requires moral judgment to deliberate whom of them chooses "the right goals", this cannot have an objective answer.
By the way, it's easy to see with these systems that existing machines that are supposedly "intelligent" and "smart" are in fact neither.
[1] "System" shall be interpreted in the broadest way possible, i.e. "any network of interconnected actors", e.g. a machine or the financial system or any society of people.