Philosophy of Mind

By -
I noticed something interesting (and hilarious, if you knew him) at the park. I was trying to get my son (almost 3) to use the sidewalk chalk that some other parent had brought. Since he likes shapes (and since I couldn't draw Thomas the Train to save my life), I tried to get him interested by drawing circles, triangles, etc.

Every time I would start, my son would immediately seize the chalk out of my hand and try it himself. He couldn't do it. So I'd pick up a different piece of chalk to do my shapes, and then he'd drop his and grab my new one. It quickly became clear that Clark thought that there was something special about the chalk that I was always holding, that allowed it to create shapes (while his pieces only created squiggles). I.e. it was as if he thought I was maliciously flipping the chalk off every time I handed it to him. I'm not a Luddite or anything, but I do wonder if Clark would have had this reaction had he not been so used to electronic toys that do all sorts of things "on their own."

Also for what it's worth, even if he were happily playing on the slide 10 feet away, if Clark ever caught me drawing again, he came over to veto the operation. A budding Republican?

Comments

  1. Rachael Anne10:25 PM

    I just find it interesting that a 31 year old man is occupying himself with sidewalk chalk even when his preschooler couldn't care less.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Bob Murphy10:11 PM

    Heh heh what a sense of humor my wife has! I'm only 26, folks.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Machine Learning"

By -
 The name is a misnomer. And a harmful one, because it interferes with understanding the process that is really occuring. What is really occurring is a search of a constrained program space. Let's say you want to be able to identify images of hot dogs . You begin with a plausible program for doing so, that is able to also search the space of nearby programs that might get better results on the problem. You then (in "supervised learning") provide scores that indicate how well one of these possible programs has done on solving the problem. After doing this for some time you settle upon a program that solves the problem "well enough." This is a great technique that can produce truly impressive results on a wide class of problems, such as identifying images of hot dogs. But notice that, except for the phrase in scare quotes, there is no "learning" in the description. Calling this "learning" is importing ideological baggage that just obscures what
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose
Read more