yea, I agree w/ a lot of this, esp. the stuff a/b the importance of context. the context of the article for me is that it's from a cs dept, yet the researchers

yea, I agree w/ a lot of this, esp. the stuff a/b the importance of context. the context of the article for me is that it's from a cs dept, yet the researchers ran some cog-sci -like experiments w/ humans, and I thought that, as a methodology, is something interesting and valuable. a lot of cs ppl will say flat out that they've intentionally put blinders on re results about the human mind / brain, which makes sense on one level b/c it's a lot to think a/b. OTOH, how does one even define intelligence w/o biology? like, to say "intelligence is what ppl do" means you need to know, quantifiably, what that is, even if you don't care how it's implemented. now, it's generally understood, and I think this is your critique if any, that we're a long way from answering such questions. one should take most descriptions of human behavior as rough, first-order approximations.