From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!mp.cs.niu.edu!rickert Sun May 31 19:04:33 EDT 1992
Article 5950 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!mp.cs.niu.edu!rickert
>From: rickert@mp.cs.niu.edu (Neil Rickert)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Grounding: Real vs. Virtual (formerly "on meaning")
Message-ID: <1992May27.193744.24133@mp.cs.niu.edu>
Date: 27 May 92 19:37:44 GMT
References: <1992May23.152941.12033@psych.toronto.edu> <1992May23.170049.31825@mp.cs.niu.edu> <1992May27.183754.8762@cs.brown.edu>
Organization: Northern Illinois University
Lines: 25

In article <1992May27.183754.8762@cs.brown.edu> Allen Renear writes:
>In article <1992May23.170049.31825@mp.cs.niu.edu> rickert@mp.cs.niu.edu (Neil
>Rickert) writes:
>
>> What I, and probably Dave, are saying, is this:  What we see is our
>>interpretation of the external world...  
>>...But we may also see a bird...
>
>Therefore (by UI, MP, &c.)  *a bird is an interpretation*   

  Not quite.  It is not the physical bird flying around that is an
interpretation.  It is what our mind recognizes as a bird that is the
interpretation by our mind.

>Are we comfortable with that?  (I thought they were animals)

  The interpretation idea is central.  This is why we can see a pattern of
colored dots on the TV screen and interpret that as a bird, too.  Or we
can hear some sounds from our walkman, and interpret that too as a bird.

-- 
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
  Neil W. Rickert, Computer Science               <rickert@cs.niu.edu>
  Northern Illinois Univ.
  DeKalb, IL 60115                                   +1-815-753-6940


