= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
johnswentworth comments on Harper’s Fishing Nets: a review of Plato’s Camera by Paul Churchland - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (8)
So, you're thinking that human abstraction ability derives from probable morphisms rather than certain morphisms over weaker classes? That makes a lot of sense.
On the other hand, from what I've seen in CS classes, humans do not seem very good at recognizing equivalences even between pushdown automata beyond a few simple cases. A human equipped with pencil and lots of paper can do a good job, but that's an awful lot more powerful than just a human.
A professional scientist falls more under "human equipped with pencil and lots of paper". Nobody said second-level learning was easy.
Maybe? I think that first what happens is that we identify a probable morphism, and then we adjust the two theories at hand in order to eliminate the uncertainty from the morphism by pushing it "upwards" (into the imprecision of the higher-level model) and "downwards" (into the parameter dimensionality of the lower-level model).