3 ms·
I agree with all the points you have presented, in that they seem to make sense to me. Something you said stuck out to me though (triple asterisks around the w
by bmer 8y ago
I agree with all the points you have presented, in that they seem to make sense to me.
Something you said stuck out to me though (triple asterisks around the word I want to put emphasis around):
> ...are using their own theories of mind and inference ability to read more into Koko's actions than what is really there.
Isn't that a judgement, that one should avoid when doing science. That is to say, the following could also be valid options, unless ruled out:
> ...something else into Koko's actions than what is really there.
> ...less into Koko's actions than what is really there.
Your thoughts?
- lambda 8y agoYes, I should have been more clear that what I meant was that this is one possible alternative explanation that hasn't been ruled out by the experiments done, not that this is the only possibility. I had said "could have been consciously or subconsciously prompting her" and should have also said "could have been using their own theories of mind and inference ability to read more into Koko's actions than what is really there." I was just trying to list one more possible explanation that the experiments hadn't ruled out, not cover everything, but you're right, those are each also possibilities.