Re: Finding useful functions- part 1

From: patty (pattyNO_at_SPAMicyberspace.net)
Date: 10/29/04 

Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 00:25:06 GMT

Wolf Kirchmeir wrote:
> patty wrote:
>
>> Wolf Kirchmeir wrote:
>>
>>> patty wrote:
>>>
>>>> Wolf Kirchmeir wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>>> No, Glen says discriminations of environmental contingencies cause
>>>>> learning.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm just curious about the language here. If i substitute "are
>>>> changes in the NN" for "cause learning" in your sentence as follows
>>>> "Discriminations of environmental contingencies are changes in the
>>>> NN", is it still true ?
>>>>
>>>> patty
>>>>
>>>
>>> Why change "cause" to "are"?
>>>
>>
>> Because there may not be any distinction between the changes in the NN
>> and the discriminations of environmental contingencies. They may be
>> different descriptions of the same thing. The morning star doth not
>> the evening star cause. Now certainly they are descriptions of
>> different (aspects?) of a some thing, but that does not change the
>> (fact?) that they are the same thing. Does it? Now if they are not
>> the same thing, then what is the distinction?
>>
>> patty
>>
>
> Point taken.
>
> IMO you are identifying the process of discriminating contingencies with
> learning. I'm not sure about that. I prefer to claim that discriminating
> contingencies causes learning, if the a organism responds. But we can't
> tell whether it discriminated contingencies if it didn't respond. And if
> it doesn't respond it will not learn. So we may say that the
> contingencies caused learning, but that's a shortcut. Hence I'm not sure
> about your identification.
>
> H'm.
>

Ok, just trying to get the ontology straight. A process creates a
change, yet the process is not the change. The process is called
"discriminating of environmental contingencies", the effect of the
process is called "learning" and that learning can also be called
"changes in the NN". Does that hold together well?

Incidentally is it not just a conjecture that "if it doesn't respond it
will not learn" ? Can't there be learning without a response? Does a
null response count as a response?

patty

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Finding useful functions- part 1
    ... patty wrote: ... > Because there may not be any distinction between the changes in the NN ... > and the discriminations of environmental contingencies. ... I prefer to claim that discriminating ...
    (sci.cognitive)
  • Re: Finding useful functions- part 1
    ... >> IMO you are identifying the process of discriminating contingencies ... >> discriminating contingencies causes learning, ... We instruct or lead a student through a learning-by-heart routine, ... Can't there be learning without a response? ...
    (sci.cognitive)
Quantcast