|Disputed term/author/ism||Author Vs Author
|Various Authors||Pinker Vs Various Authors||I 26
Robots Basic Laws/Asimov: 1) A robot may never hurt a human being, 2) it must obey the orders of humans, unless the orders conflict with the first law 3) It must protect its own existence, unless this conflicted with the 1st or 2nd law.
PinkerVsAsimov: he was not able to position himself outside his own thought processes. The ability of humans to do evil is not considered, and their support is not excluded by the laws.
Brain/Emotion/Tradition: "Triune brain": Unity of the cerebrum as evolutionary palimpsest of three layers: 1) Bottom: base ganglia (reptiles), seat of the primitive and selfish emotions
2) Limbic system: softer, more social emotions (parent feelings etc.)
3) The two are surrounded by the modern mammalian brain, the neocortex, which grew rapidly during evolution and is home to the intelligence.
PinkerVsTrinity Theory (with Paul MacLean): the evolutionary forces do not simply accumulate layers. Although our bodies are witnesses of the past, they only possess few parts that have not been modified. Even the appendix is now conceded a function in connection with the immune system. Not even the circuits for emotions remain unaffected. (i.e. also: VsDennett?).
Emotions are easy to reprogram! E.g. after less than 1,000 years of breeding dogs include Pitt Bulls and Saint Bernards. Furthermore, the cortex is not riding piggyback on the prehistoric limbic system. The systems work hand in hand. The amygdala dyes our experiences with feelings. It liaises with virtually every other part of the brain.
Def SSM/"Sociological Standard Model": separation between culture and biology. Thesis: biological evolution was replaced by cultural evolution. (E.O.Wilson, later became victim of angry protests). LewontinVsWilson.
Incorrect quotes of the opponents: E.g. Dawkins: "Genes created us, body and mind." (correct).
VsDawkins: wrong quote: "genes control us, body and mind."
Seeing/PinkerVsGombrich, Ernst H.: contrary to popular belief, we do not see what we expect to see.
Seeing/Marr: completely ignores the backs, and even the surfaces. He analyzed the form of animals as if they had been made of pipe cleaners. Seeing/BiedermanVsMarr: assigns to every e.g. animal multiple geone combinations for different views.
PinkerVsBiederman/PinkerVsGeones: it is precisely this concession that opens the possibility that forms are recognized in a completely different way. Why should we not think the idea through and assign many memory elements to every form, one for each position? Such memories do not need an exotic object-centered frame of reference, but can use the coordinates of the two-and-a-half dimensional sketch as long as there are so many memories that all perspectives are covered.
Pinker: that was dismissed for many years from the outset. It took perhaps 40,000 aspects for each subject (memory elements). But this does not cover the positions outside the center of the field of vision yet!
In recent times, it was considered, however, that for each object at most 40 aspects are sufficient when interpolating between views.
Direction/Up/Down/Seeing/Pinker: People adjust themselves to the top down direction: if Africa lies on its side, it is not recognized, a square is not a diamond. This brings a further dilution of the geone theory: relations such as "over" or "above" must come from the retina, and not from the object.
This limitation is likely to be indispensable, because often there is no way to define the "up" in an object before you recognized it!
We can also turn objects in our mind (VsGeones). This makes a frame of reference of geones oriented to the object even less necessary.
How the Mind Works, New York 1997
Wie das Denken im Kopf entsteht München 1998