Brain, Behaviour and Extensionalism
curt at kcwc.com
Sat Apr 17 05:58:45 EST 2004
patty <pattyNO at SPAMicyberspace.net> wrote:
> Curt Welch wrote:
> > By trying to bring in any form of the Lion into the meaning of the
> > sign, you have just used language to cut off the branch you were
> > standing on and have wandered into an maze of twisty passages all
> > different which you can't get out of. You have passed through the
> > looking glass and are coexisting with the reflections instead of living
> > in the real world. How many different ways can I find to say this? :)
> I think you are arguing furiously, but not with me.
It's that idiot in my head I keep arguing with.
Your comments are all good.
On the aove..., I don't know shit about the meaning of meaning. And I
certainly don't have the language to talk about it. What I have really
done is decided I can (and should) just duck under all that and go straight
to what I belive is the machine creating it. What I was getting at above
is that we quickly get lost in complexity if we try to understand the
meaning of meaning, and to understand the "true" meaning of meaning, you
can ignore it all do what I'm doing, going straight to a very simply (but
very limited) definition of "meaning" as being "how the receiver of the
sign reacts to it". This approch I'm quite sure will work fine and allow
me to create AI, but it will never help me understand the complexity of
what has already been done in all the knowldge engeneering and language
fields. Pertending I know anything about that would be wrong.
Curt Welch http://CurtWelch.Com/
curt at kcwc.com Webmaster for http://NewsReader.Com/
More information about the Neur-sci