To: | "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
---|---|
From: | Steven Ericsson-Zenith <steven@xxxxxxx> |
Date: | Mon, 5 Jan 2015 13:14:06 -0800 |
Message-id: | <CAAyxA7tErZuMqxjMphT9WoN=3iKj=wsyq97EcbKG58LFnu-vFQ@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
I am afraid that you miss the point Rich. You are guilty of dualism in your argument. You cannot, I argue, separate out learning in this way. Again, I suspect that the learning activity is intrinsic to the overall structure, so your model is a "no-go," it really does not matter how hard you try. Recall that many of our effective activities are learned by the body. Steven On Sun, Jan 4, 2015 at 6:20 PM, Rich Cooper <rich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
_________________________________________________________________ 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 (01) |
Previous by Date: | Re: [ontolog-forum] A No-Go Result For Human-Level Machine Intelligence, Melvin Carvalho |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: [ontolog-forum] A No-Go Result For Human-Level Machine Intelligence, Rich Cooper |
Previous by Thread: | Re: [ontolog-forum] A No-Go Result For Human-Level Machine Intelligence, Rich Cooper |
Next by Thread: | Re: [ontolog-forum] A No-Go Result For Human-Level Machine Intelligence, Rich Cooper |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |