Эволюционирует ли наш разум с распространением знаний и технологий? 19 сентября эксперт в области когнитивистики, профессор университетов Квебека и Саутгемптона Стивен Харнад ответил на этот вопрос в центре Digital October.
http://digitaloctober.ru/ru/events/knowledge_stream_kognitivnoe_neveroyatnoe
1. StevanHarnad
Canada Research Chair in Cognitive Sciences
Université du Québec à Montréal
&
Professor of Web Science
University of Southampton
Knowledge Stream 19 sept 2013
29. Knowledge Stream 19 sept 2013
Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text
Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text
> Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text
> Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text
Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text
Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text
> Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text
> Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text
Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text
Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text
> Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text
> Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text
Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text
Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text
> Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text
> Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text
31. Knowledge Stream 19 sept 2013
Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text
Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text
> Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text
> Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text
Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text
Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text
> Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text
> Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text
Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text
Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text
> Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text
> Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text
Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text
Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text
> Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text
> Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text Text
52. Jorge ArmonyBernard BaarsMark BalaguerSimon Baron-Cohen
Roy Baumeister Bjorn Brembs John Campbell Erik Cook Fernando
Cervero Paul CisekAxel CleermansGary Comstock Antonio
DamasioDan DennettGregory Dudek Jeffrey Ebert
David Edelman Shimon Edelman Barbara Finlay Dario Floreano
Stan Franklin David Freedman Michael Graziano Patrick Haggard
StevanHarnadInman Harvey Eva Jablonka Phillip Jackson David
Jacobs Hakwan Lau Joseph Ledoux Malcolm MacIver Stefano
Mancuso Julio Martinez Jennifer Mather Alfred Mele Bjorn Merker
Thomas MetzingerEzequielMorsellaKarim Nader
GualtieroPiccinini Christopher Pack Luiz Pessoa Gilles Plourde
Alain Ptito Amir Raz David Rosenthal Anil Seth John
Searle Michael Shadlen Amir ShmuelWolf Singer WayneKnowledge Stream 19 sept 2013
http://turingc.blog
spot.ca
53. Knowledge Stream 19 sept 2013
Borner, Katy graphic webs of science Dedeo, Simon collective dynamics on WikipediaDorogovtsev, Sergey
network evolution Dror, Itiel cognitive technology and distributed cognition: the risks Gingras, Yves
scientific interaction before and since the Web Gloor, Peter collaborative networks Golbeck, Jennfer social
web Goldstone, Rob internet-enabled imitation and exploration in social networks Gordon, Deborah
collective behaviour -- beginning of the conference Griffin, Stephen web-based interactive scholarship
Hall, Wendy web science Halpin, Harry web semantics Han, Jiawey knowledge mining Hendler, Jim data
webHey, Tony science web Heylighen, Francis global brain & distributed intelligence
Kousha, KaivanwebmetricsLiu, Yang-Yu network control Menary, Richard extended mind
Monnin, Alexandre web philosophyNeylon, Cameron open science data-mining Nishikawa, Takashi
community structure (&Motter, A) Radicchi, Filippo network communities Rupert, Rob extended mind philo
Simon, Judith socio-technical epistemology Steyvers, Mark crowdsourcing& wisdom of crowds Stibel, Jeff
web & brain Tetlow, Phil web life Todd, Peter memory search, external foraging, and web search
Talk about Web Science and the Mind. Berners-Lee invented the Web. Socrates invented philosophy, and philosophy of mind
FromGlossogony to Google (Glossogony is the beginning of language) Evolution of Communication to the Cognitive Commons. We will talk more about what cognition is. For now, assume cognition means thinking. A “commons” is a grazing field that belongs to no individual but to everyone. Anyone’s sheep and cows can graze there.
Much of cognition is categorization, and acquiring new categories. To categorize is to do the right thing with the right KIND of thing, such as learning which mushrooms can be eaten and which cannot. We can categorize by eating vs not-eating, or by calling them edible ones mushrooms and the inedible ones toadstools.
Words are names of categories. Categories have members and non-members, and categories can themselves be members of categories, e.g., apples are fruits
We put things in the same category because they are more more similar, but it is not so simple: sometimes things more similar because we put them in the same category. Reds look more like reds, and yellows like yellows, but that’s because our brains make them look more alike. Really they are just continuous differences in the frequency of lightwaves.
In the lab, we have shown that if experimental subjects are trained, by trial and error, to categorize textures based on rules about their features that the subjects do not know, then if the category is hard to learn, the subjects that learn it show a “rainbow” effect of learning: Textures that are in the same category look more like one another than they did before the subject learned the category. This is called “categorical perception” and is related to the “Whorf Hypothesis” that the language influences our perceptions: The way we name and categorize things changes the way they look to us.
These changes in our perception when we acquire new categories are also reflected in changes in our brain activity. On the left we see the change emerging in the brain wave as the subjects learn the category the hard way by trial and error. On the right we see a similar effect when they are told the rule verbally. The difference is important, because trial and error is slow, uncertain and risky, whereas verbal description is fast, safe and reliable. We think that was the enormous adaptive advantage that led to the evolution of languagein our species.
In an artificial life computer simulation, little creatures had to learn about three different categories of mushrooms: The mushrooms that were edible had spots on their tops and those that were poisonous toadstools did not. The mushrooms that had to be marked were striped, those that did not had none. And the ones to which they had to return had both spots and stripes. All creatures vocalized what they were doing: EAT, MARK, RETURN. All the creatures had to learn the edible mushrooms and the markable mushrooms by trial and error, getting sick and going hungry if they made mistakes.. But the returnable mushrooms could be learned in two different ways, the same way as the rest, by trial and error, or by overhearing those creatures who had already learned that the returnable mushrooms were EAT and MARK. So they could learn it the hard, long, risky way, or they could learn it by “hearsay” from thpse who already knew that RETURN = EAT + MARK. Those who learned the easy way instead of the hard way survived and reproduced better, and in a few generations they were the only kind of creature left: Language is a revolutionary new way of learning new categories by fast reliable verbal instruction instead of long risky experience. Perhaps this is how and why language evolved.
If so, then the birth of language was also the birth of the “category commons” --- all the shared categories that we call knowledge, and that we pass on by word of mouth. For example, if I tell a child that toadstools are mushrooms with stripes. One sentence, and he has the new category, no time lost, no risk.
Language is reciprocal altruism. Leads to OA
But some words need to be grounded the old way: how many?
4 revolutions: question of timing
Returns discourse to the speed of thought
No doubt this is collaborative and interactive cognition
`cognition is as cognition does: Explain the causal mechanism that generates our capacity to do what we can all do
