Re: machine thinking

From: ray scanlon (rscanlon_at_nycap.rr.com)
Date: 06/26/04 

Date: 26 Jun 2004 08:55:03 -0700

Rick Craik writes:

> The only predicate I was after is the state of synapses. Your previous
> post was remarkably focused on inhibitor signals. For example, the
> state of the synapses for a model neuron may have to follow a
> situational law based on logic. The signals arriving may not be
> of that form of logic, but the situation could be reduced to one such
> logic statement. Something like synapses being reduced to OR and
> XOR relations for positive and negative associations. Although
> I see it as a bit more complex for a neuron in a group, the basic
> idea is there.

In my opinion, this is a debate over whether the predicate calculus is
a proper vehicle for describing the thinking brain; I think not. If we
exclude the "middle", the whole world can be divided into those things
that are and those things that are not. We can denote those things
that are with the symbol "+", and those things that are not with the
symbol "-". All are agreed.

But when considering a thinking machine (not the brain, a machine),
this approach has not worked out too well. The problem is the
exponential increase in complexity as we increase the number of
place-holders. The programmers of chess playing machines abandoned
this approach a long time ago.

You say, "The signals arriving may not be of that form of logic, but
the situation could be reduced to one such logic statement". This is
the sort of hand-waving that is beloved of professors. They say,
"True, in principle". I would also say, "True in principle". Now what!

I say, in principle, "A thinking brain can be described". Then I say,
"But not with the predicate calculus". The first is a statement of
hope, the second of experience. Fiddle-Dee-Dee.

I know, from personal experience, that the predicate calculus is
beautiful. I also believe it is not the way to go. The predicate
calculus is great on the black board before a philosophy seminar, but
neuroscientists do not think much of it.

ray

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Questions about a distribution
    ... of the delay is going to be in vision, where the delay between retina and ... From primary motor strip to muscle, ... will be two synapses, one in spinal cord and one at the muscle, for maybe ... recognizing signals at all take a while to show themselves. ...
    (sci.stat.math)
  • Re: you guys are morons
    ... Signals between the synapses are either sent or not. ... That happens to be a common misperception of how neurons work. ...
    (talk.origins)