On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 6:41 PM, Mike Tintner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Pei, > > A misunderstanding. My point was not about the psychology of > observation/vision. I understand well that psychology and philosophy are > increasingly treating it as more active/reasoned and implicitly referenced > Noe. My point is that *AI* and *AGI* treat observation as if it is passive > rather than reasoned - that I can't remember any discussion of this in any > context here or related places (& would welcome references otherwise) - and > the opinions you have expressed seem consistent with this.
Even that is not true --- see http://users.rsise.anu.edu.au/~rsl/rsl_active.html for example. I'm sure there are more out there. You are correct that MOST PEOPLE in AI treat observation/perception as pure passive. As on many topics, most people in AI are probably wrong. However, you keep making claim on "everyone", "nobody", ..., which is almost never true. If this is your way to get people to reply your email, it won't work on me anymore. There are many open problems in AI, so it is not hard to find one that haven't been solved. If you have an idea about how to solve it, then work on it and show us how far you can go. Just saying "Nobody has idea about how to ..." contribute little to the field, since that problem typically has been raised decades ago. Pei > Let me put this in context for you. Imaginative and visual reasoning are > massively underestimated throughout our culture. So, for example, while we > have had cognitive linguistics, & Lakoff & co talking about the fundamental > embodiment of language (and maths and symbol systems) for 2 to 3 decades > now, it was only last year that the first journal of Cognitive *Semiotics* > was brought out. Visual reasoning and tacit knowledge are obviously not new, > but they are v. understudied. Within 5 years, though, (& Ben can come back & > laugh at me if I'm wrong), they will have exploded as areas of study. > > > > > Mike Tintner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >> Everyone is talking about observation as if it is PASSIVE - as if you > >> just > >> record the world and THEN you start reasoning. > > > > Mike: I really hope you can stop making this kind of claim, for your own > > sake. > > > > For what people have been talking about on this topic, see > > > > http://www.amazon.com/Why-We-See-What-Empirical/dp/0878937528/ref=sr_1_6 > > http://socrates.berkeley.edu/~noe/action.html > > http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/Xplore/login.jsp?url=/iel1/5/291/00005968.pdf > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------- > agi > Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now > RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ > Modify Your Subscription: http://www.listbox.com/member/?&; > Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com > ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: http://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=95818715-a78a9b Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
