I'd like to hear @sarahdoingthing and @KevinSimler discuss http://m.nautil.us/issue/47/consciousness/the-kekul-problem …
-
-
lots of howlers in this but my favorite is probably > There is no selection at work in the evolution of language
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @regretmaximizer @vgr and
??? did you know ??? languages evolve by random walk. no selection, no dynamic structure. therefore [incoherent linguistic mysticism]
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
I tried to think of what he could possibly mean by that and my best guess at the point was "Chomsky grammars are all or nothing"
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
I.e. I'm guessing he sees a sharp division between chomskyean languages and communication that don't have that structure
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Once you're in post-Chomsky stage it's more memetic evolution racing ahead, not genetic (since all humans can learn all languages)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Not defending... agree it's incoherent. Just trying to steelman it/apply miller's law (in what sense could he be right?)
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @vgr @KevinSimler
I like the idea that language is infectious but I don't think this is the most compelling defense of it
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes
the ethological evidence is disappointing depending on the claim
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.