Empiricist Mentalist Semantics

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Empiricist Mentalist Semantics"

Austen Henry
5 years ago
Views:

1 Empiricist Mentalist Semantics Barry Nouwt Master s Thesis Cognitive Artificial Intelligence Supervised by Dr. H.L.W. Hendriks June 2008

2 Contents Introduction Intersubjectivity Objection Self-applicability Objection Abstract ideas Objection Conclusion Further Research / Discussion 2/29

3 Introduction Computers can speak, read and hear sentences Computers cannot understand meaning of sentences Semantic theory to implement meaning 3/29

4 Introduction Semantic theory from philosophy. Ludwig Wittgenstein and Gottlob Frege are recent and popular. However, not suitable for implementation because non-mentalist. Let s look at less recent semantic theories! 4/29

5 Introduction Mentalist Semantic theories from 17 th century. John Locke s Empiricist Mentalist Semantic Theory from his book An Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1690). Seems more suitable for implementation on computers. Let s take it as our starting point! 5/29

6 Introduction Three serious objections against Empiricist Mentalist Semantic Theory (EMST) Intersubjectivity Objection (Frege) Self-applicability Objection (Wittgenstein) Abstract Ideas Objection (Berkeley) How can these three objections be met? 6/29

7 Intersubjectivity Objection Intersubjectivity: two subjects attribute the same information to words (e.g. tree ). Without intersubjectivity, communication is impossible. Intersubjectivity and communicating computers. 7/29

8 Intersubjectivity Objection TREE I 8/29

9 Intersubjectivity Objection Two subjects attribute the same information to the word tree. Without intersubjectivity, communication is impossible. Intersubjectivity and communicating computers. 9/29

10 Intersubjectivity Objection Gottlob Frege explains 1 why EMST must be incorrect: It would be impossible for something one man said to contradict what another man said, because the two would not express the same thought, but each his own. 1 See Picardi (1996, Section Frege s anti-psychologism ) 10/29

11 Intersubjectivity Objection TREE I 11/29

12 Intersubjectivity Objection TREE I 1 I 2 12/29

13 Intersubjectivity Objection TREE I 1 I 2 I 1 I 2 EMST 13/29

14 Intersubjectivity Objection Similarity plays a crucial role in meeting the objection. Jonathan Lowe says 1 : [I]t is hard to see how there can be any intersubjective, publicly available criterion for the similarity of ideas occurring in two different minds. We will suggest such a criterion. 1 See Lowe (1995, p. 151) 14/29

15 Intersubjectivity Objection Web-similarity criterion: Two ideas are web-similar if and only if they are related in the same way to other web-similar ideas. This criterion assumes two webs-of-ideas within two different subjects A and B. 15/29

16 Intersubjectivity Objection Web-of-ideas of Subject A Web-of-ideas of Subject B 4 A 4 B 1 A Websimilar 1 A = 1 B 1 B 3 A 3 B 2 A 2 B 16/29

17 Intersubjectivity Objection Web-similarity = intersubjective, publicly available criterion. white A snow A snow B black B black A Snow is black Snow is white white B Subject A Subject B 17/29

18 Self-Applicability Objection Application criteria: observable similarity. For example the idea tree. However, applying ideas to reality leads to an infinite regress 1 of interpreting the interpretation of an interpretation, etc. 1 See Lowe (1995, p.164) and Stokhof (2003, pp ) 18/29

19 Self-Applicability Objection Reality Inside subject? 19/29

20 Self-Applicability Objection Only way out: ideas are self-applying. Wittgenstein and Stokhof 1 : self-applying ideas are not plausible. Lowe 2 : self-applying ideas are plausible. Compare ideas with coin-slots in an automatic vending machine. 1 See Stockhof (2003, p. 40) and Wittgenstein (1958, p. 37) 2 See Lowe (1995, pp ) 20/29

21 Self-Applicability Objection 21/29 1 eurocent coins 10 eurocent coins 1 euro coins

22 Abstract-Ideas Objection According to John Locke 1 the idea triangle : must be neither Oblique, nor Rectangle, neither Equilateral, Equicrural, nor Scalenon; but all and none of these at once. That is: the idea triangle must be indeterminate with respect to certain properties. 1 See Locke (1690, Section IV.vii.9) 22/29

23 Abstract-Ideas Objection Idea triangle? 23/29

24 Abstract-Ideas Objection Therefore 1 : the idea of man I frame to my self, must be either of a white, or a black, or a tawny, a straight, or a crooked, a tall or a low, or a middle-sized man. Since image-like ideas cannot be indeterminate, EMST is incorrect because it cannot explain the existence of abstract ideas. 1 See Bennett (1971, p. 36) 24/29

25 Abstract-Ideas Objection What if ideas are not image-like? Locke and others 1 hint at ideas being pattern-like, but do not elaborate. Maybe pattern-like ideas can be indeterminate and represent all types of triangles. 1 See Lowe (1995, p. 156) and Locke (1690, Section III.iii.19 and Section III.iv.2) 25/29

26 Abstract-Ideas Objection Regular Expression = definition of a pattern in strings of characters. For example: ^[a-z0-9._%+-]+@[a-z0-9.-]+\.[a-z]{2,4}$ abcd012@abcd.ab johndoe@hotmail.co.uk this@is.not.a.match Regular Expression can be indeterminate with respect to certain properties. 26/29

27 Abstract-Ideas Objection Suggestion: Similar pattern definitions only not for strings of characters. Just like RegEx, can these patterns be indeterminate with respect to certain properties. These patterns might be able to represent all types of triangles. 27/29

28 Conclusion Intersubjectivity Objection: Web-of-ideas Web-similarity Self-Applicability Objection: Ideas are slot-like (as coin-slots in vending machines) Abstract-Ideas Objection: Ideas are pattern-like (analogous to RegEx) Updated EMST is just a first step! 28/29

29 Further Research / Discussion Web-of-ideas: Is it plausible and what are their properties? Slot-like ideas: Are they compatible with current knowledge about the brain? Pattern-like ideas: Are they powerful enough to account for meanings of all words? Web-of-ideas: What is their relation to semantic structures? 29/29

30 Semantic Structure Source: 30/29

Philosophy 203 History of Modern Western Philosophy. Russell Marcus Hamilton College Spring 2015

Philosophy 203 History of Modern Western Philosophy Russell Marcus Hamilton College Spring 2015 Class #18 Berkeley Against Abstract Ideas Marcus, Modern Philosophy, Slide 1 Business We re a Day behind,