Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!decwrl!sun-barr!newstop!sun!amdahl!kp From: kp@uts.amdahl.com (Ken Presting) Newsgroups: comp.ai Subject: Re: Chess, Reductionism. Summary: Another customer for Implementationism? Keywords: emergence, reductionism, implementation Message-ID: Date: 17 Mar 90 02:41:02 GMT References: <349@ntpdvp1.UUCP> Reply-To: kp@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com (Ken Presting) Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA Lines: 48 In article <349@ntpdvp1.UUCP> sandyz@ntpdvp1.UUCP (Sandy Zinn) writes: >> (Ken Presting) writes: >> The question of handling abstract rules in a physical system is very >> important for AI. Inside a Von Neumann machine, everything looks like >> symbols crunched according to rules (according to some writers). Inside >> a neural net, nothing looks like symbols or rules (again according to >> some). What is the relationship between processes, perceptions, and >> rules? > >Get out your flame-throwers, guys. I think (at one level) (From the marketing literature for "Implementationism":) "Are you sometimes at a loss to find your level of abstraction?" > > rules = representation (symbols) = processes = perception > "Do you find yourself asserting the identity of incomparable categories? > >You just add more time as you go across.. . . > "Have you ever been in a situation of acute algebraic embarrasment?" > >. . . E.G. a process is a "description" of relationships over time. > "Scare-quote supply running low...?" "You owe it to yourself to try our BRAND NEW, and IMPROVED Concept: !!! IMPLEMENTATIONISM !!! "Builds stronger theories, 12 ways!" "Just look: A process is an implementation of relationships over time. WOTTA CONCEPT! Makes almost any theory almost believable!" "(Think at your own risk. Scare-quote tradeins accepted)" Flames? What flames? I *agree* with Sandy! Ken Presting ("If it's funny, it can't be all wrong")