Richard:Personally, I think that embodiment makes the development process
vastly
easier, but this black and white declaration of IMPOSSIBLE! that you
shout seems to go too far.
Well, that's the point of discussing this - yes, the culture still allows
your position. But the new cog sci developments have been coming fairly
thick and fast in the last 10 years - and you can probably track their
growing influence in Ben's development over that time, which seems to me
steadily more & more embodied, like that of the culture.
Re Hawking, etc. the quadriplegic *from birth* is the really interesting
case. And Googling there seem to be a good number of these, v.intelligent.
But, at a glance, they use things like mouthsticks, and they are moved
around places., and they see and smile, and have a body which emotes and can
be used to understand others' emotions. So there's still considerable
physical engagement with the world. None of them suffer the total
imprisonment of your machines ). But certainly, it would be interesting to
study their development, and I welcome any informed comments.
It's only fair, though - no? - to turn the question back at you. Which
subject area[s] is/are *not* embodied - are possible to understand *without*
a need to see and grasp, or any other kinds of embodiment?
-------------------------------------------
agi
Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now
RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/
Modify Your Subscription:
http://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=98558129-0bdb63
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
