On Jan 28, 2008 6:48 PM, Mike Tintner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Tom:"embodied cognitive science" gets 5,310 hits on Google. "cognitive > science" gets 2,730,000 hits. Please back up your statements, > especially ones which talk about "revolutions" in any field. > > Check out the wiki article - look at the figures at the bottom such as > Lakoff & co & Google them. Check out Pfeiffer. Note how many recent books > in philosophy, psychology and cognitive science are focussing on embodiment > in one way or other. Check out the Berkeley/ California configuration of > these guys. Check out morphological computation - and the relevant > conference.
Quite frankly, I don't have the time to go reading through an entire field of stuff simply to prove a point. > Check out Ramachandran: > > "Without a doubt it is one of the most important discoveries ever made about > the brain, Mirror neurons will do for psychology what DNA did for biology. > They will provide a unifying framework and help explain a host of mental > abilities that have hitherto remained mysterious..." Mirror neurons *do* seem like an important discovery in cognitive science, but they're specific to humans (and other animals with complex nervous systems), not to intelligences in general. The general principle (look at another system and copy its behavior) can be applied just as easily to purely electronic systems as physical ones. Remember COPYCAT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copycat_%28software%29)? > Read Sandra Blakeslee - The Body has a Mind of its Own - also just out. [She > did Jeff Hawkins before]. The author is a professional writer, not a scientist, and has no published papers that I can find. To quote from the front page of the book's website (http://www.thebodyhasamindofitsown.com): "Your body has a mind of its own. You know it's true. You can feel it, you can sense it, even though it may be hard to articulate. You know your body is more than just a meat-vehicle for your mind to cruise around in, but how deeply are mind, brain and body truly interwoven?" This is clearly 'pop sci' writing, probably with little technical content. > Even s.o. like Ben, if you track his development - he can correct me - is > using embodied more and more - and promoting "virtually embodied AI's." > > Unlike most mainstream cog. sci. , the embodied version, you'll find, > really is scientific and has a commitment to scientific experiment and > testing of its ideas. Please stop posting audacious claims without references. Claiming that all of cognitive science is "unscientific", while some small subfield is "scientific", certainly qualifies as audacious. > It's as I said an untrumpeted revolution but if you think about it, it's > inevitable. Just try thinking without sensation, emotion and movement. > Brains in a vat are fine for philosophers but they just haven't worked for > any kind of AGI, or any of the faculties that AGI needs. [And stay cutting > edge). See http://www.singinst.org/upload/LOGI//foundations.html. > > > > > ----- > This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email > To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to: > http://v2.listbox.com/member/?&; > - Tom ----- This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to: http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=4007604&id_secret=90874087-bdefc8
