Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (5):651-652 (1998)
|Abstract||Van Gelder's clear distinction between the quantitative nature of dynamical systems and the nonquantitative nature of computational processes provides a firm basis for distinguishing between processes that happen in time and processes that happen over time. Symbolic reasoning, the presumed basis of intelligent behavior in robots, happens over time. However, the movements and actions that robots must make to behave intelligently, happen in time. Attempting to connect the two, as classical artificial intelligence and robotics have presumed to be necessary, has produced a tension and an arbitrarily moving interface in the construction of robots. Adopting a robotic version of the dynamical hypothesis offers sound theoretical and scientific justification for those robotics researchers who continue to insist that getting the interaction dynamics of intelligent behavior right is a purely dynamical matter, and never a symbolic computational one.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Peter K. McInerney (1991). Time and Experience. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Theodore Sider (2002). Time Travel, Coincidences and Counterfactuals. Philosophical Studies 110 (2):115 - 138.
Eva Hoffman (2009). Time. Profile Books.
Jun Tani (2004). The Dynamical Systems Accounts for Phenomenology of Immanent Time: An Interpretation by Revisiting a Robotics Synthetic Study. Journal of Consciousness Studies 11 (9):5-24.
Lee McCauley (2007). AI Armageddon and the Three Laws of Robotics. Ethics and Information Technology 9 (2):153-164.
Jill North (2011). Time in Thermodynamics. In Criag Callender (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Time. Oxford.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads3 ( #213,130 of 722,744 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?