Does ANYBODY in the newsgroup besides Mentifex see ANY trace of Hubel &
Wiesel in that stupid diagram?
Even if it WERE based on this level of analysis, it would obviously
have nothing to do with ANY of the terms in that "diagram" (maybe just
a graphically elaborated LIST?), even the putatively "visual" terms, no
matter how broadly interpreted. "Image percept engrams"??? "Visual
memory"??? "Recognition"?? How silly can you get and still stay out
of the silly farm?
Have you, at long last, sir, no shame??
n.b.: the "Thank you" at the beginning of his quote was out of context:
it was NOT a thank you to Mentifex (he snipped quite a bit).
In <35b81f75.0 at news.victoria.tc.ca> mentifex at scn.org (Mentifex) writes:
>>Netdoctor Dr. F. Frank LeFever "flefever at ix.netcom.com" on 23 Jul
>>>> >> /^^^^^^^^^^^\ The Architecture of a Robot Brain /^^^^^^^^^^^\
>>>> >> /visual memory\ ________ / auditory \
>>>> >>| /--------|-------\ / syntax \ | memory
|>>>> >>| | recog-|nition | \________/---|-------------\
|>>>> >>| ___|___ | | | | _______ |
|>>>> >>| /image \ | __V___ ___V___ | /stored \ |
|>>>> >>| / percept \ | /deep \------/lexical\----|--/ phonemes\|
|>>>> >>| \ engrams /---|---/concepts\----/concepts \---|--\ of words/
|>>>> >>| \_______/ | \________/ \_________/ | \_______/
>>Thank you! Besides the problem of undefined terms, there is the
>>problem I alluded to long, long ago: the lack of any correspondence
>>between these line and box constructions and KNOWN cerebral
>>connections, which are far more complex and interesting, and moreover
>>divide what seem (to the untutored) obvious categories into
>>categories--for example, such "simple" dissections of visual input as
>>those of Hubel and Wiesel, and dissections further along the visual
>>stream (e.g. dorsal vs. ventral streams), alternative routes to
>>phonology as shown by Deep Dyslexia, etc., etc.
>>New York Neuropsychology Group
>> Ah, the Monday morning AI, Neuro, Robotics seminar rocks the Net.
>> The above-diagrammed Mind Model is entirely based upon Hubel and
> Wiesel's discovery of mammalian (feline) feature-extraction, BUT:
>> For purposes of AI and Robotics (seminar groupings), the visual
> memory channel needs only to deliver image-recognitions to the
> rest of the associative mindgrid.
>> Surely, it is interesting to know HOW vision works, and the
> knowledge of feature-extraction was a "conditio sine qua non"
> for the development of this over-arching mind-model. Nottheless,
> the Mentifex Model has not yet been found to be in disagreement
> or in conflict with any known facts about the human visual system.
>> For instance, the notion that vision is broken down into many
> wisely separate "planar" processing areas fits in. [End of post.]