TheOtherDave comments on Rationality Quotes July 2013 - Less Wrong

5 Post author: Vaniver 02 July 2013 04:21PM

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

Comments (425)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: TheOtherDave 02 July 2013 03:25:18AM 1 point [-]

Don't underestimate the power of variations.

When shaping behavior in animals, we start with something the animal does naturally and differentially reward natural variations. Evolution of biological systems also involves differential selection of naturally occurring variations on existing systems. So it's certainly possible to get "something new" out of mere "variants of something [that already existed]".

That said, many cognitive systems do also seem capable of insight, which seems to be a completely different kind of process. Dennett and Schank here seem to be dismissing the very possibility of insight, though I assume they are doing so rhetorically.

Comment author: RolfAndreassen 02 July 2013 03:40:34PM 3 points [-]

What has a baby which does not understand speech "heard before", that it can form variations on? Evolution is fine, but you do need a theory of abiogenesis, or in this case aontogenesis - knowledge-from-nothing-ness, in the vernacular.

Comment author: TheOtherDave 02 July 2013 04:39:35PM 6 points [-]

Babies are not clean slates; there exist innate behaviors. We can get into a theoretical discussion of where these behaviors came from if you like, but I don't need a theoretical justification to observe that babies do in fact do things they haven't been taught to do.

Comment author: RolfAndreassen 02 July 2013 07:34:58PM 1 point [-]

Quite so, but this contradicts the original idea that everything is variants on something that has been heard before.

Comment author: shminux 02 July 2013 07:54:22PM 1 point [-]

I interpret "heard before" to include "programmed in your genetics".

Comment author: TheOtherDave 02 July 2013 09:41:36PM 0 points [-]

This.

Comment author: Vaniver 02 July 2013 07:16:35PM *  3 points [-]

While I agree with TheOtherDave's point, I'm not sure it's necessary. A baby doesn't understand new sounds the first time it hears them, but may understand them the hundredth time it's heard them- at which point it does have quite a bit of experience, both of hearing those noises in some situations and not hearing those noises in other situations. Then, once they've learned the general skill of acquiring words, they can correctly learn words quickly, sometimes even after hearing a single use- but that's drawing on their previous experience in learning thousands of words.