> Now, I understand well that the human brain is a mess with a lot > of complexity, a lot of different parts doing diverse things. > However, what I think Minsky's architecture does is to explicitly > embed, in his AI design, a diversity of phenomena that are better > thought of as being emergent. My argument with him then comes > down to a series of detailed arguments as to whether this or that > particular cognitive phenomenon > > a) is explicitly encoded or emergent in human cognitive neuroscience > b) is better explicitly encoded, or coaxed to emerge, from an AI system
A not incidental point here is that Minsky's "design" lacks any learning dynamics that could possibly lead to anything emerging. I had an argument with Minsky about this in the late 90's, and he basically told me he thought the notion of emergence as applied to cognitive systems was a crock of nonsense... Basically, the people at this human-level AAAI symposium seemed divided into: * those who agree with Minsky that cognitive emergence is a crock * those who think that cognition emerges entirely from perception and action Complex, self-organizing dynamics of cognition is a foreign concept, a kind of gibberish, to most [of course, not all] of these folks ;-) -- Ben G ------- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
