Epstein Secrets

WAIS is wrong! > How do you know for sure what the "basics" are? While the literal understanding of the Turing Test leads nowhere (or, well, to the Loebner prize), I think that he had the right idea. Intelligence is reflected in the ability to participate in meaningful discourse, which includes interpr

al, inference, analogy building etc. to work. And some have to do with the requirements of translating between Mentalese (in Pinker's sense, not in Fodor's) and natural language. I may delude myself in thinking that I know what the basics are. In fact, it is extremely likely that I do (every computer

WAIS is wrong! > How do you know for sure what the "basics" are? While the literal understanding of the Turing Test leads nowhere (or, well, to the Loebner prize), I think that he had the right idea. Intelligence is reflected in the ability to participate in meaningful discourse, which includes interpr

al, inference, analogy building etc. to work. And some have to do with the requirements of translating between Mentalese (in Pinker's sense, not in Fodor's) and natural language. I may delude myself in thinking that I know what the basics are. In fact, it is extremely likely that I do (every computer

WAIS is wrong! > How do you know for sure what the "basics" are? While the literal understanding of the Turing Test leads nowhere (or, =ell, to the Loebner prize), I think that he had the right idea. =ntelligence is reflected in the ability to participate in meaningful =iscourse, which includes interpre

val, inference, =nalogy building etc. to work. And some have to do with the requirements =f translating between Mentalese (in Pinker's sense, not in Fodor's) and =atural language. I may delude myself in thinking that I know what the basics are. In =act, it is extremely likely that I do (every computer

llenging) » How do you know for sure what the "basics" are? > While the literal understanding of the Turing Test leads nowhere (or, > =ell, to the Loebner prize), I think that he had the right idea. > =ntelligence is reflected in the ability to participate in meaningful > =iscourse, It may be reflect

val, inference, =nalogy building etc. to work. And some have to do with the requirements =f translating between Mentalese (in Pinker's sense, not in Fodor's) and =atural language. I don't disagree with any of the above > I may delude myself in thinking that I know what the basics are. In =act, it is e