Variable outputs can be described by rules

Even granting that a given state of a connectionist network could lead to a variety of further states, a set of rules could still be formulated to describe its behaviour.

This is because rule forms have:
 
"implicit conventions of simplification when a single input representation might lead to distinct output representations".

So, the syntactic argument holds.

Kenneth Aizawa, 1994, p.484.


Note
: The debate between Aizawa and Horgan & Tienson about rules is carried out with much more precision than could be captured here. In the technical discussion, issues of quasi-exceptionless rules, probabalistic laws, and ceteris paribus rules are raised.
RELATED ARTICLESExplain
Artificial Intelligence
Can computers think? [1]
Yes: connectionist networks can think [5a]
Connectionist networks can think without following rules
Representations without rules
The Syntactic Argument
The Multiple Realisability Defence
Variable outputs can be described by rules
Graph of this discussion
Enter the title of your article


Enter a short (max 500 characters) summation of your article
Enter the main body of your article
Lock
+Comments (0)
+Citations (0)
+About
Enter comment

Select article text to quote
welcome text

First name   Last name 

Email

Skip