MixedNuts comments on Connectionism: Modeling the mind with neural networks - Less Wrong

39 Post author: Yvain 19 July 2011 01:16AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (20)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: MixedNuts 19 July 2011 06:51:07AM *  15 points [-]

These do not strike me as failures to replicate human brains:

the question "name one person who is not a barbaric Mongol warlord" would still return "Genghis Khan"

Name an object that isn't a jar of peanut butter. What did you immediately think of? (Yeah, you correct afterward. But still, I'd be more likely to blurt out "Genghis Khan" than to the question "Name one person".)

you can convince the toy network McDonalds is your best dining choice just by saying its name a lot

That's how advertising works, isn't it? See also believing everything we're told and your own post on repeated affirmation.

Comment author: Nornagest 19 July 2011 06:04:16PM *  8 points [-]

Name an object that isn't a jar of peanut butter. What did you immediately think of?

A jar of peanut butter. Then a jar of jam. Sample size of one, but that looks a lot to me like filtering activated concepts.

The problem as I understand it is precisely that the spreading activation model doesn't include any natural way of doing that filtering.

Comment author: jimmy 19 July 2011 09:30:28PM 2 points [-]

The problem as I understand it is precisely that the spreading activation model doesn't include any natural way of doing that filtering.

Well, it may not be obvious how the error correction works, but it still explains the part that generate the hypotheses to be chosen.

This is similar to the stroop effect, and from studying that kind of stuff, they've figured out which part of the brain (ACC) actually does the error correction. Since it's a completely separate part of the brain that handles error correction, there's no reason to think that the part that generates the errors works differently.

Comment author: epigeios 04 August 2011 02:56:16AM *  3 points [-]

Name an object that isn't a jar of peanut butter. What did you immediately think of?

An elephant. Due to the fact that the question that's usually asked is about elephants. So I thought of elephants before I finished the sentence

Second, I thought of a jar of peanut butter.

I still haven't consciously thought of another object yet, except just now as I was thinking about what object I might think of, and thought of the spoon I was using to eat my food.

Comment author: [deleted] 17 September 2011 10:48:49AM 0 points [-]

Name an object that isn't a jar of peanut butter. What did you immediately think of?

A jar of peanut butter. Then a knife, and then a piece of toast.