Jim, I think about the issue you emphasize of no 'independent concepts' frequently. It plays a role in my latest approximate design. Mike A
On Tuesday, October 7, 2014, Jim Bromer via AGI <[email protected]> wrote: > Some years ago I kept mentioning my idea that concepts are relativistic > hoping that someone would discuss the effects of this relativism with me. > Eventually someone who was willing to talk to me once in a while became a > little exasperated with me for repeating this over and over, and he > explained that two authors had written a textbook on Cognitive Science that > he read had pointed out that Concepts were relativistic back in 1972. > (Implying that my idea was not new or particularly interesting.) I > wondered if that was possibly true so I wrote a reply and told him that I > would make a point to read that book. I made a note to get a copy the next > time I was in the state university library. A few months later I found a > reference in Wikipedia to the authors he had mentioned and it was quite > clear that they frequently emphasized the point that Concepts were related > in their textbooks. > > Yes of course Concepts are related. But my choice of the term > "relativistic" was not drawn from my cornucopia of grammatical errors or > because I wanted to pretentiously use a term from physics but because I was > trying to get the idea across that Concepts are not only related - they are > relativistic. > *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> > <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/11943661-d9279dae> | > Modify > <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> > Your Subscription <http://www.listbox.com> > ------------------------------------------- AGI Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/21088071-f452e424 Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21088071&id_secret=21088071-58d57657 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
