When Einstein heard about Quantum Mechanics and the idea that everything is a probability, he said: "God doesn't roll dice". He meant that even though Quantum Mechanics does give us many answers about the world of the tiny, it doesn't truly explain it. I believe that a similar analogy can be made to this case.
Norvig vs. Chomsky and the Fight for the Future of AI
151–152 of 152 posts
Re: Norvig vs. Chomsky and the Fight for the Future of AI
#152Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm completely ignorant here - is it widely established that there's no link between how we think about things versus the languages we speak ? It seems intuitive that our ability to conceive of concepts would be dependent on having/creating language that can describe them, even in our own minds, but I have no idea how anyone could really know one way or the other.
I think it's widely accepted in linguistics (IA kind of AL) that language influences conceptualisation (sometimes called the weak Sapir-Whorf hypothesis) but that it does not determine conceptualisation (the strong version). See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_relativity
right, I'm familiar with sapir-whorf...but the parent comment here specifically refers to sapir-whorf as "mumbo-jumbo". Seems like the linguists still aren't keen on it.