The sensorimotor system

The subsymbolic paradigm, supplemented by an account of the body’s role in meaningful cognition, overcomes problems that plague classical AI (see detailed text).

In classical symbolic AI, representations are only meaningful by virtue of arbitrary associations with things in the world. Connectionist representations (i.e. activation patterns), by contrast, are intrinsically meaningful by virtue of nonarbitary connections to eyes, ears, limbs, and so forth, which in turn are dependent on the surrounding world.

George Lakoff (1988).

Note: Also, see sidebar "Postulates of experiential realism", on Map 3.
RELATED ARTICLESExplain
Artificial Intelligence
Can computers think? [1]
Yes: connectionist networks can think [5a]
The Subsymbolic Paradigm
The sensorimotor system
George Lakoff
Common sense and connectionism
Between-module structures
Connectionist networks can’t elaborate capacities quickly
Smolensky's treatment of levels is problematic
Statistical rationality needed
Symbolic processing in specially crafted networks
Too much representation, not enough dynamics
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