Clancey's ideas on new category creation are ill-founded
Clancey's ideas about the creation of new categories are too radical and are not supported by the research. Some relatively constant categories are necessary and their existence has been demonstrated in animals.
Immediately related elementsHow this works
-
Artificial Intelligence Â»Artificial Intelligence
▲
Can computers think? [1] Â»Can computers think? [1]
▲
Yes: physical symbol systems can think [3] Â»Yes: physical symbol systems can think [3]
▲
The Representationalist Assumption Â»The Representationalist Assumption
▲
The representational tradition is flawed Â»The representational tradition is flawed
▲
The Situated Action Paradigm Â»The Situated Action Paradigm
▲
The mechanisms situated action describes are symbol systems Â»The mechanisms situated action describes are symbol systems
▲
More to human thought than symbol maniputation Â»More to human thought than symbol maniputation
▲
Clancey's account of symbols is too limited Â»Clancey's account of symbols is too limited
■
Clancey's ideas on new category creation are ill-founded
+Kommentare (0)
+Verweise (0)
+About