You’ll have to read your way through the literature.

D

> On Apr 19, 2023, at 2:27 PM, Helmut Raulien <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>  
> Dan, List,
>  
> First i apologize for posting unrelated in the main thread.
>  
> I appreciate your argument and find it a great insight. Now, is this a 
> refutation of Chomsky´s theory or not? A computer program perhaps does not 
> need such a module, because it can research and develop language from 
> universal (natural) logic with Peirce´s contribution to discovering it 
> included. But maybe the evolution of the brain works differently: There is no 
> direct, analytical reference to universal logic, I would say. Evolution is 
> all about viability. But of course, viability is greater if it is in accord 
> with universal logic. It then simply works out, while when not being in 
> accord, it doesn´t. But, with a direct link to logic missing, I guess for 
> evolution it is a good idea, to install viable, well tested routines for 
> modules from time to time, which are then inherited and give instructions. So 
> maybe humans do have a grammar module, although for a computer such a thing 
> is not necessary. Instead of "module" you may call it "instinct", i think, 
> like a bird knows how to build a nest without first logically pondering "What 
> should I do to have something to lay my eggs in?". So, all i wanted to 
> object, was, that all that is not a refutation of Chomsky´s work. That is, 
> unless he explicitly should have claimed, that this module/instinct is the 
> starting source/reference of language, and does itself not have a reference 
> to logic. Which would be absurd, i think.
>  
> Best Regards
> Helmut
>  
> 19. April 2023 um 19:37 Uhr
>  "Dan Everett" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> ChatGPT simply and conclusively shows that there is no need for any innate 
> learning module in the brain to learn language. Here is the paper on it that 
> states this best. https://ling.auf.net/lingbuzz/007180
>  
> From a Peircean perspective, it is important to realize that this works by 
> inference over signs. 
>  
> Dan
>  
> On Apr 19, 2023, at 12:58 PM, Helmut Raulien <[email protected]> wrote:
>  
> Dan, list,
>  
> ok, so it is like I wrote "or it is so, that ChatGPT is somehow referred to 
> universal logic as well, builds its linguistic competence up from there, and 
> so can skip the human grammar-module". But that neither is witchcraft, nor 
> does it say, that there is no human-genetic grammar-module. And I too hope 
> with the Linguist, that we dont have to fear ChatGPT more than we have to 
> fear a refrigerator.
>  
> Best
> Helmut
>  
>  
> _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ��� PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply 
> All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to 
> [email protected] . ��� To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message NOT to PEIRCE-L 
> but to [email protected] with UNSUBSCRIBE PEIRCE-L in the SUBJECT LINE of 
> the message and nothing in the body. More at 
> https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/help/user-signoff.html . ��� PEIRCE-L is owned 
> by THE PEIRCE GROUP; moderated by Gary Richmond; and co-managed by him and 
> Ben Udell.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
► PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON 
PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to [email protected] . 
► To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message NOT to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] 
with UNSUBSCRIBE PEIRCE-L in the SUBJECT LINE of the message and nothing in the 
body.  More at https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/help/user-signoff.html .
► PEIRCE-L is owned by THE PEIRCE GROUP;  moderated by Gary Richmond;  and 
co-managed by him and Ben Udell.

Reply via email to