[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] just been brought to my attention

To: "'[ontolog-forum] '" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "Rich Cooper" <rich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2009 12:55:53 -0700
Message-id: <20090717195617.DF0C1138D45@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>





Rich Cooper


Rich AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com




Thank you for the interesting point. To me all learning seems to be

incidental, that is not voluntary or intended and we cannot unintend or undi

what we have seen orm learnt that way.


RC>  Santayana says life comes at you like a freight train and the best thing you can do is learn from it.  Or something like that. 



Thus forgetting is not intentional

either.Learning an association betwwn a tag (verbal idenifier) and a chunk

of reality, however may be intentional, but incompletely performed. So to me

it is learning form and content. Form is the tag, and the content whatever I

manage to connect it with. We tend to have an incremental progressmin

learning tags, like I often cite my expereince with students who were to

learn names of plants in Botany and names of bones in Anatomy. They had to

learn tags in twop languages (Latinm and native) and had to be able to

associate them with the picture r the object. But they usually failed to

learn both tags at a time.This means to me that there is some anchoring

process involved and we often remember forms, but do not remember content

(just words, no menaing, may be brand names, etc. that I have not got a clue

what they associate with.


RC> One well known memory trick is to memorize forms with variable parts, and to consciously associate the stimulus you want to remember with variable slots in that form. 


On the other hand we have knwoledge completed with

content possible to decribe in details in words or identify "meaning"

So we are aware of what we have seen before, and are familiar with and

complete new things which we identify by giving it a (verbal) form such as

unidentified flying object, uin which case we produce or create a concept,

which is an object, which has a form (its name) and content as properties

(as in the name)


RC> Kolmogorov would say we compress the complete memory form into a tag for more efficient linguistic communications.


When we cannot recognize something at a distance as form (an object) we may

still be able to recognize its content (its properties, like it is small, it

is green it is stationary, etc.). This is how I visualize first tiem

encounters and learning more abotu them comes with further mental operations

called folding...


RC> At this point, I have scanned your web pages, but I have no intuitive understanding of why you use the term "folding" for this mysterious operation.  My napkin is folded, the brain has folds, volumes have manifolds, and Origami is masterfully skilled paper folding, but what do you mean by "folding"?







 ----- Original Message -----

From: "John Bottoms" <john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Sent: Friday, July 17, 2009 7:50 PM

Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] just been brought to my attention



> Frank,

> Oh, I'm sure there is a study somewhere that proves this,

> but the following is my informal understanding.


> There appear to be two (2) main mechanisms for learning.

> The first is when the item to be remembered is available

> from an associated link. For example, I say "apple" and

> you say, "oh, yes, we had apples at the picnic."


> The second type is when the links are not from a stated

> item but from a previous item, such as when we learn the

> letters of the alphabet.


> The implementations for these two types of recall would be

> different if the intention was to simulate human recall.


> One of the interesting questions of this area concerns how

> much is in conscious memory and how much is unconscious. This

> again, has to do with models of human recall, not physiological

> models. My belief is that we commit things to unconscious

> memory if we would like to store them with no vetting of the

> data. We memorize that "B" follows "A" without questioning

> the teacher for the source of that sequence.


> -John Bottoms

>  FirstStar

Concord, MA

>  T: 978-505-9878




>> Thank John,

>> I know about motivating that way, that is not my question. I try again.

>> Would the internal representation, process , etc. of the brain be

>> diffeernt.

>> In other words the chunks to be remembered word by word are limited for

>> the

>> short term memory, but in the long run everything seems top be bnuolt in

>> somehow and be possible to retreive. Now retrieval of a long long text

>> and

>> anything short associated with any chunk of verbal cue - would they be

>> difeferntly embodied or implemented?

>> Cheers Frank

>> ----- Original Message -----

>> From: "John Bottoms" <john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

>> To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

>> Sent: Friday, July 17, 2009 5:51 PM

>> Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] just been brought to my attention




>>>The "http://pda.physorg.com/" posting seems to be a bit

>>>of propaganda, not much new there.


>>>And for your question: "b)" seems to be obvious. Any time

>>>a demand is made, along with a requirement for an explanation,

>>>an additional demand, I would expect that the results would

>>>be better.


>>>There was that study that came out recently about stressing

>>>the level of competition before taking of a test. It appears

>>>that stressing competition (& in a small group) before a test

>>>coerces students to do bette, reducing the noise of the scores.


>>>-John Bottoms

>>> FirstStar

>>> Concord, MA

>>> T: 978-505-9878




>>>>Hi all,

>>>>I think you should have guessed it too. However

>>>>It may be time to start cross postings :-))


>>>>My question:

>>>>Is there a difference in the neurocognitive result of leanring

>>>>a) to rende a long line of uttereances later word by word, like  apome,

>>>>a role, a saga, etc. and

>>>>b) to learn any  verbal input with a demand on response that shows

>>>>understanding and not just echoing thes ame patterns (is that "rote






Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/  
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/  
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ 
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    (01)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>