Slightly out of order, but close to right 
-
-
Replying to @NeuroYogacara
But on the left, not close to left, which is fine by me.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
-
Replying to @evantthompson
The correct order is you, Dan, Andy...you need both your book and Dan’s book to see clearly where Andy goes wrong
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @NeuroYogacara @evantthompson
Any chance you could spell this out? I have read Evan's book, and a good portion of Andy's, as well as other books of Dan. I like the general embodied/enactive picture but Andy loses me with what feels like an over-reliance on the computer metaphor.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @SethLeon9 @evantthompson
I don’t think that computation should ever be seen as a metaphor! But we share a worry about Andy’s willingness to collapse everything into a single algorithm (working on three ways of saying that in different places; I promise to share when any of them are done) 1/
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
What Dan gets is the way that culture shapes affordances, in ways that pull away from the reliance on a hierarchical model of the sort that Andy presupposes
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
What Evan gets right is the role of self-regulation and embodiment. My views are constantly getting closer to Evan’s, though I don’t share his worries about computation (I understand them, and he may be right). But I agree that we need a much more biological view of minds! 3/3
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @NeuroYogacara @SethLeon9
Depends for me a lot on what exactly "computation" means
2 replies 0 retweets 9 likes -
Replying to @evantthompson @SethLeon9
Any recommendations for where I could learn more about varying definitions of computation? Thanks!
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
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.