Yes… there’s still some proofs in high school geometry, I believe, but no real explanation of what a proof is and why you should care, so I suspect it’s totally forgotten at the end of the year
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
-
This. The significance and nature of proofs is not taught at school, and mostly not even understood by the teachers, because they don't understand the concept of epistemology.
1 reply 0 retweets 7 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Right… and, unfortunately, I don’t think the MIT professors I had as a math undergraduate understood the issues involved at all well either. Anyway, were unwilling to discuss them!
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
And then you ran into the
@rodneyabrooks and he irrevocably burned your brain because you had no epistemological defenses against his embodimentalism and you despaired and because a Buddhist1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Plinz @puellavulnerata and
Just for the historical record, Phil Agre and I got embodiment from Lucy Suchman and Hubert Dreyfus. Rod came to it independently at the same time (as did Leslie Kaelbling & Stan Rosenschein).
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Meaningness @puellavulnerata and
When I read Dreyfus, I already had a strong epistemological filter in place, and was only parsing him as: what does he see that everybody else (Turing, Minsky, etc.) is missing? But to read him as primary indoctrination... OMG
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Plinz @puellavulnerata and
When I first read Dreyfus, I had completed a math undergrad degree, a master’s degree in AI, and extensive graduate work in mathematical logic. I was not naive…
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness @Plinz and
The essential insight is not about bodies but about the world: that it is radically unknowable, due to ontological nebulosity, and effective action has to work under that constraint
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
This does not go far enough. The very notion of a world that underlies the premise of embodiment is questionable. The meaning of information is only its relationship to changes in other information, not its reference to facts in the world, even of they are nebulous.
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @puellavulnerata @Meaningness and
The ideas of embodiment lead to anti-representationalism and anti-functionalism. Mind was no longer emergent over the computational activity of a nervous system but over the interaction between somehow non-computational body and environment.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes - 15 more replies
-
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.