I posit that all strict hierarchies *must* be violated for any[†] work to be 
done[‡]. In other words, strict hierarchies are fictions. They don't exist 
except in our imagination. So, the difference the violation makes is: Of course 
it violates a strict hierarchy; otherwise it wouldn't have worked. 8^)

[†] Well, any *significant* work to be done. The idea that an organism is more 
complex than a machine seems to be simply the qualifier that the work it does 
is somehow meaningful ... not merely rote.

[‡] I further posit that this is the separation between specific and general 
intelligence. The reason humans are capable of executing tasks that are difficult to 
automate is because "we are large, we contain multitudes" (bastardizing 
Whitman).

On 5/4/19 5:51 PM, Frank Wimberly wrote:
If you're moving up from the phoneme to the word to the phrase level and
some result in the last disambiguates between two phonemes, what difference
does it make that you've violated some strict hierarchy?

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Reply via email to