The math this guy performs is so questionable and his idea that Deep Learning is the pinnacle of biologically plausible cognitive modelling is incorrect. I writ

The math this guy performs is so questionable and his idea that Deep Learning is the pinnacle of biologically plausible cognitive modelling is incorrect. I write about this [in a blog post](https://medium.com/@seanaubin/deep-learning-is-almost-the-brain-3aaecd924f3d https://medium.com/@seanaubin/deep-learning-is-almost-the-br...). tl;dr doing pure Deep Learning (also known as connectionist) models of the brain limits your tools in a bad way. Using tools from Dynamicism and Symbolicism is better. As proof, check out Spaun, the world's largest functioning brain model. Note: I mostly just disagree with him philosophically, in terms of his reasoning because it's overlooking some evidence. Don't really have an option on his conclusion. Probably agree with him more than I disagree with him.