COMMENT ⊗   VALID 00002 PAGES
C REC  PAGE   DESCRIPTION
C00001 00001
C00002 00002	1988 dec 30
C00007 ENDMK
C⊗;
1988 dec 30

The idea is to start a ``stream of consciousness'' file.

On the Dennett review, I need to decide what points to make in
general and what specific comments to make.  Does inadequate AI
result from wrong philosophy.  Is there anything besides sequence
extrapolation?  Positivism could do harm, but it doesn't seem
to have had the opportunity.  No-one works with sense impressions
or the input-output relations directly.  Anyway there would have
to be a real study.

Send a copy of my review to Bloomfield.  Ask Aspray when it will
appear.  Number of Babbage Institute was disconnected.

Errors in Ginsberg's intro to his nonmonotonic readings moved
to ginsbe[f88,jmc] and mailed to him 1988 dec 30.

1988 dec 30

We can imagine the fact that the people and other objects in
the boat normally move with it either as the result of a
default or as a known fact.  Successful experience with a
default causes it to be learned.  The theory should tolerate
both being present.  I don't see any problem.

1989 jan 2
quote from stich - from folk psychology to cognitive science
p77
In more recent years a rather analogous attempt at conceptual
analysis has been launched by people working in artificial
intelligence and cognitive simulation.  Their focus has been
on domestic concepts rather than exotic ones.  Typically their
goal has been to describe some interrelated set of commonsense
concepts in sufficient detail to assemble a computer simulation
which can process information invoking these concepts in ways
similar to the ways people process them.  Now on my view,
philosophical conceptual analysis, when done properly, ought to be
continuous with the project of the cognitive simulator.