Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy,comp.ai,comp.robotics,comp.cog-eng,sci.cognitive,sci.psychology
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!news.mathworks.com!hookup!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!torn!nott!cunews!rwhite
From: rwhite@superior.carleton.ca (Robert White)
Subject: Re: Grounding Representations: CONFERENCE May 15 London
Message-ID: <rwhite.795319853@superior>
Sender: news@cunews.carleton.ca (News Administrator)
Organization: Carleton University
References: <harnad-1503952148320001@sm1.psy.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 1995 02:10:53 GMT
Lines: 57
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.ai.philosophy:26027 comp.ai:28170 comp.robotics:18942 comp.cog-eng:3052 sci.cognitive:6816 sci.psychology:38487

In <harnad-1503952148320001@sm1.psy.soton.ac.uk> harnad@ecs.soton.ac.uk (Stevan Harnad) writes:

[.]
>Intelligence is that computer programs use symbols that are arbitrarily
>interpretable (see Searle, 1980 for the Chinese Room and Harnad, 1990
>for the symbol grounding problem). We could, for example, use the word
>"apple" to mean anything from a "common fruit" to a "pig's nose". All
>the computer knows is the relationship between this symbol and the
>others that we have given it. 


Systems theory provides a grounded approach to solving this problem
and I have seen the same 'signification' models used within
metamodeling as I have within Semiotics. I was especially surprised to
see almost the exact same model used by Roland Barthes in his book
entitled Mythologies. The structure of the model is tripartite and
each signal is generated to create a 'signifier' and a 'signified'
semiotic meaning. The signals are always moving back and forth from a
'signification' to a 'signifier' along to being labeled as
'signified'. I have just bastardized the model, but I have essentially
given it to you in appropriate form. Moreover, the structure of the
model is perhaps the most interesting aspect because of the steps in
function of meaning and the slope of the meaning. If I can use those
descriptors.
 

ps.... If you want the Information processing ref that I have I'll
find it. Additionally, I have seen this same model described in
literature on creativity, mythology, Systems theory, metamodeling,
cybernetics, and I have even seen it in Pribram's work.



>The question is, how is it possible to
>move from this notion of meaning, as the relationship between arbitrary
>symbols, to  a notion of "intrinsic" meaning. In other words, how do we
>provide meaning by grounding computer symbols or representations in the
>physical world?

>ROOM and SYMBOL GROUNDING problems.   Hence this colloquium has as its
>focus, "grounding representations.

Check out the ancient art of paper folding known as Origami. 


>The colloquium will occur over one day and will focus on three themes:
>(1) Biology and  development; (2) Computational  models and (3) Symbol
>grounding.


[.]
-- 
   ----------------------------------------- Carleton University ----------
               Robert G. White               Dept. of Psychology   
                                             Ottawa, Ontario. CANADA
   INTERNET ADDRESS ----- rwhite@ccs.carleton.ca ------------------- E-MAIL
   ------------------------------------------------------------------------
