4 ms·

The brain needs to form structure before any sort of reinforcement learning is even possible. This structure comes from an "unsupervised" process we don't under

by rm999 11y ago

The brain needs to form structure before any sort of reinforcement learning is even possible. This structure comes from an "unsupervised" process we don't understand well.

justicezyx 11y ago
Isn't it from millions year of natural selection? The reason why a human brain can think, is just by chance.
- daveguy 11y ago
  Personally I think a lot of it has to do with evolution. We certainly have different sections of the brains that are more utilized in different tasks, auditory, visual, motor, etc. I think it is likely a lot of the initial feedback is preset -- the instinctual positive and negative responses of certain stimulus.
- conceit 11y ago
  As much as it doesn't help to call it intelligent design, chance is not any good either, if asking for a reason. Random chance is as good as no reason at all.
  - justicezyx 11y ago
    Mixing natural selection and intelligent design is a problem, but that's not a problem for natural selection.
    - conceit 11y ago
      What's the context? The GP probably meant that intelligence is an emergent property not directly coded in DNA. Natural selection is not pure chance. At least seeing it that way doesn't yield anything except maybe lowered expectations. You want some expectations. Hiding you theory behind Nature is not any less religious. Nature is pretty much synonym with living things, existence in general, and actually stems from to be born. Nature as the reason for things being born is thus kind of true by definition. The rational behind the generational evolution is the exact opposite of pure chance, though. Chance is only applicable if there are two possible outcomes. In hindsight, only one outcome was possible, so there are no chances, just facts. The argument I am getting at is, self similarity seems to be such a common property, that it's maybe inevitable somewhere in a complex system. From there to self awareness and critical thinking is a long way to go, but what you call millions of years is a blink of an eye on a cosmological scale. The idea of complexity includes enough variety to appear random to us, so we might agree that it's just a difficult to express concept and this is only semantic quibbling.

by rm999 11y ago

The brain needs to form structure before any sort of reinforcement learning is even possible. This structure comes from an "unsupervised" process we don't understand well.

justicezyx 11y ago

Isn't it from millions year of natural selection? The reason why a human brain can think, is just by chance.

daveguy 11y ago
Personally I think a lot of it has to do with evolution. We certainly have different sections of the brains that are more utilized in different tasks, auditory, visual, motor, etc. I think it is likely a lot of the initial feedback is preset -- the instinctual positive and negative responses of certain stimulus.
conceit 11y ago
As much as it doesn't help to call it intelligent design, chance is not any good either, if asking for a reason. Random chance is as good as no reason at all.
- justicezyx 11y ago
  Mixing natural selection and intelligent design is a problem, but that's not a problem for natural selection.
  - conceit 11y ago
    What's the context? The GP probably meant that intelligence is an emergent property not directly coded in DNA. Natural selection is not pure chance. At least seeing it that way doesn't yield anything except maybe lowered expectations. You want some expectations. Hiding you theory behind Nature is not any less religious. Nature is pretty much synonym with living things, existence in general, and actually stems from to be born. Nature as the reason for things being born is thus kind of true by definition. The rational behind the generational evolution is the exact opposite of pure chance, though. Chance is only applicable if there are two possible outcomes. In hindsight, only one outcome was possible, so there are no chances, just facts. The argument I am getting at is, self similarity seems to be such a common property, that it's maybe inevitable somewhere in a complex system. From there to self awareness and critical thinking is a long way to go, but what you call millions of years is a blink of an eye on a cosmological scale. The idea of complexity includes enough variety to appear random to us, so we might agree that it's just a difficult to express concept and this is only semantic quibbling.