Clancey's account of symbols is too limited
Clancey errs in his criticism of the symbol systems hypothesis and in his claims for situated action.
Alonso Vera & Herbert Simon (1993c).
Immediately related elementsHow this works
-
Artificial Intelligence »Artificial Intelligence
Can computers think? [1] »Can computers think? [1]
Yes: physical symbol systems can think [3] »Yes: physical symbol systems can think [3]
The Representationalist Assumption »The Representationalist Assumption
The representational tradition is flawed »The representational tradition is flawed
The Situated Action Paradigm »The Situated Action Paradigm
The mechanisms situated action describes are symbol systems »The mechanisms situated action describes are symbol systems
More to human thought than symbol maniputation »More to human thought than symbol maniputation
Clancey's account of symbols is too limited
Clancey's ideas on new category creation are ill-founded »Clancey's ideas on new category creation are ill-founded
Symbol systems aren't confined to linguistic symbols »Symbol systems aren't confined to linguistic symbols
The situated action paradigm is untestable »The situated action paradigm is untestable
Herbert Simon »Herbert Simon
+Komentarai (0)
+Citavimą (0)
+About