only because of a preference to evolve intelligent capabilities instead of reverse engineering a design from written language, modern computer systems and logic
-
-
-
Replying to @GaryMarcus
copying from the best? (nature) I imagine there is a lot of culture / taste / preference in these choices —- in mine, yours and everyones
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @danbri
mine is also about copying the best, from nature.I wrote a full monograph on why humans have about half the things in the list below; Liz Spelke devoted her career to most of the rest. You are dismissing her work and mine.pic.twitter.com/WnnPvkUuiI
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @GaryMarcus
how am I dismissing it? I was jist saying there are traditions in AI (namely alife and evolutionary computing) that are expliitly concerned with innateness There are lots of good things on that list, I neither dismissed nor endorsed it
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @danbri
you seem to dismiss symbol-manipulation because it comes from somewhere other than “nature.” but my life’s work has to been to show that symbol-manipulation is part of human nature. spelke similarly has shown eg that spatiotemporal contiguity is part of human nature.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GaryMarcus
I don’t dismiss symbol manipulation, I just view it as amongst our most advanced capabilities /inventions and find the underlying more animal primitives more interesting some of my best friends are symbol manipulators!
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @danbri
all of the human ones. the thing is was asking for an argument about why not implement my list, and you said it was taste about copying from nature. even newborns seem to manipulate symbols (see judit gervain’s followup to my 1999 science study)
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @GaryMarcus @danbri
At what point do you see 'symbol manipulation' arising in biology? Is this a capability that is solely available for present-day humans? What about humans prior to literature? Humans prior to civilization? Humans prior to language?
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
I wonder if you can consider something like chemotaxis as a kind of symbol manipulation. Ligand -> coherence No ligand -> decoherence. The binding of the thing to the domain is not the thing the bacteria uses for nutrients. It just directs the organism to things like it.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
there's no operations over variables, which is what i identified in The Algebraic Mind chapter 2 as core to symbol-manipulation hypothesis. (almost anything could be described as a symbol, depending on your preferred definition of that term.)
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.