Look at your dog when it is asleep. It is barking and whining and yelping quietly in all sort of ways. That means it is dreaming, that means it has thoughts! The difference is only in complexity of thoughts.
The problem isn't asking questions, the problem is continuously interrupting after asking a question and refusing to listen. What's the point of asking a question to ignore the answer.
The OP referred to him as the "french guy" because there were two question askers, one with an obvious french accent and one without, so he wanted to properly identify who he was referring to. I don't think there was any racial bias or malice intended
As I understand it, there are more who side with the interrogator than with Chomsky on this (gradualism vs sudden appearance). Noam has always been a renegade of sorts. But, this is what concerns me. If he's right (which I think he is), but all the funding is going to the other view (probabilistic theories and algorithms), then what happens to the field? Will we spend decades (or longer) following the wrong path and being lost in the wilderness, before another 'Chomsky' comes along and has to re-event the wheel?
Digital infinity is a technical term in theoretical linguistics. Alternative formulations are "discrete infinity" and "the infinite use of finite means". The idea is that all human languages follow a simple logical principle, according to which a limited set of digits-irreducible atomic sound elements-are combined to produce an infinite range of potentially meaningful expressions. 'Language is, at its core, a system that is both digital and infinite. To my knowledge, there is no other biological system with these properties....' - Noam Chomsky[1]
I dont know what or who elicit the radical move,thats why i asked, but the only thing that i believe is that all languages are from one source,not as they write in etymology that they are 3 families, there is connections
Maged Abul Dahab I asked for a viewpoint, not the answer per se. you could be right; i gather you adhere to the u.g. concept. i don't know if you watched the full 'plenary'. according to what some preach by the latest findings of neuroscience (yes, another huge gap), the puppeteer is being pushed aside. one source for language and for life itself? edit: leave that last question out.
i think that the visual language of the octopus is far more sophisticated than auditory language of humans. The octopus transmits shit loads of data in a split second. At the time it takes Noam Chomsky to clear his throat an octopus "sings" an Odyssey.
Ellie Carlson There's no "perfecting" the language- it's either on or off. That was Chomsky's point. By "language" he doesn't mean German or French or whatever- he means the ability of humans to think creatively through a system of arranging dicrete linguistic elements into infinately many configurations or assemblies. The only valid point Changeux had was that this transition could have happened elsewhere in the evolutionary branching- but that is uncertain. All of your other comparisons to technology and something about evolution not being possible without it are completely mistifying.
Ellie Carlson there is no such thing as the "beginning stage of evolutionary process", whatever that means. You misunderstand how evolution works. It doesn't begin or end anywhere. Your last comment illustrates your general confusion- no one has said there is no "potential" of using human cognitive abilities. That's different to the process of evolution. What you're doing is equivocating on evolution and it obfuscates the arguments made in the video (hence my original comment).
Ellie Carson I don't care about your beliefs, I've addressed your arguments and pointed out your misapprehensions. Then you claimed we are "not talking about the same thing" and that I am the one who's confused without addressing any specifics. You are not thinking clearly.
The guy with the French accent makes very interesting points throughout, these are not taken up by Chomsky either. I would love to hear a straight out debate with these two where each is speaking their native language. The other guy makes a point about prehistoric history being unavailable to us and Chomsky starts up " all humans have the capacity for arithmetic..." (12:16). A bit of a super-slow rant, hardly patients at all, as others suggest. If humans are so *ucken dynamic and creative why are we marching into the precipice of environmental disaster while we are picking our teeth in front of a computer screen. Capitalism has us worn out and no new philosophy since Hegel. At least the Neanderthals didn't bring the world down around them when they went underground. Huh! Ah! Bah!
Human language is only special because its the only one we can understand. If we were Dolphins, Dolphin language would be special. Humans for the most part,certainly not Mr Chomsky, are not intelligent nor aware enough to comprehend all the languages of Earth life. With that said, though, it seems though we had alien help.
Why do people always undermine human intelligence? No, Dolphin's aren't as smart as humans. They don't have complex economic systems, write books, record history, build spacecraft, or power computers with solar energy. Dolphin language may be special, but is still rudimentary compared to the vastly evolved human communication.
Dolphins dont have a language in the technical sense, they have a mode of communication. Humans do too, but the purpose of language is not communication, its to help us understand and rationalize the world and make decisions that ensure our survival.
Most important human for the last 100 years
one of them.
Sure :)
but perhaps the most patient human in the last xxx years
Haha, too true!
And for the next 100 years
thanks for this and the plenary series.
*Chomsky, Bever, Palmarini (UofA), Changeux (CdeF)..
The longer Noam talks, the quieter he gets!
What does he mean by animal modes of communication are discrete/finite or continuous?
They have a finite communicatio system humans is infinite
Look at your dog when it is asleep. It is barking and whining and yelping quietly in all sort of ways. That means it is dreaming, that means it has thoughts! The difference is only in complexity of thoughts.
Our language limits our views more than anything else
And our language enables us to think things we could never have come up without language.
This french guy just doesn't get it
The problem isn't asking questions, the problem is continuously interrupting after asking a question and refusing to listen. What's the point of asking a question to ignore the answer.
The OP referred to him as the "french guy" because there were two question askers, one with an obvious french accent and one without, so he wanted to properly identify who he was referring to. I don't think there was any racial bias or malice intended
Alright everyone it was really not a serious comment, I wrote it in like 10 seconds.
That's a great point! The "french guy not getting it" led to more great chomsky content!!!
@@jondoh9414 yes!
As I understand it, there are more who side with the interrogator than with Chomsky on this (gradualism vs sudden appearance). Noam has always been a renegade of sorts.
But, this is what concerns me. If he's right (which I think he is), but all the funding is going to the other view (probabilistic theories and algorithms), then what happens to the field? Will we spend decades (or longer) following the wrong path and being lost in the wilderness, before another 'Chomsky' comes along and has to re-event the wheel?
You and I will carry the Chomskian torch then and spread THE words to those who will listen.
Digital infinity is a technical term in theoretical linguistics. Alternative formulations are "discrete infinity" and "the infinite use of finite means". The idea is that all human languages follow a simple logical principle, according to which a limited set of digits-irreducible atomic sound elements-are combined to produce an infinite range of potentially meaningful expressions.
'Language is, at its core, a system that is both digital and infinite. To my knowledge, there is no other biological system with these properties....'
- Noam Chomsky[1]
Thanks for the clarification
Ah ok, maybe I get it.
we need a stork in here, asap :p
Language is the means that allows humans to navigate what I call the matrix of possibilities.
Truth tables?
The question is what elicit the radical change, lightening or hallucinogenic drug or angel from the sky with a message from diety?
Maged Abul Dahab
god of the gaps?
imho isntworthmuch good point, lol
Maged Abul Dahab
what is 'your' viewpoint?
I dont know what or who elicit the radical move,thats why i asked, but the only thing that i believe is that all languages are from one source,not as they write in etymology that they are 3 families, there is connections
Maged Abul Dahab I asked for a viewpoint, not the answer per se. you could be right; i gather you adhere to the u.g. concept.
i don't know if you watched the full 'plenary'. according to what some preach by the latest findings of neuroscience (yes, another huge gap), the puppeteer is being pushed aside. one source for language and for life itself?
edit: leave that last question out.
The french guy should leave noam as he is a lecturer who explains what he said later
yep. he always circles back to his point while walking through the logic.
i think that the visual language of the octopus is far more sophisticated than auditory language of humans. The octopus transmits shit loads of data in a split second. At the time it takes Noam Chomsky to clear his throat an octopus "sings" an Odyssey.
s Ray if you got 2 to 4 years in life like the octopus, you ve got to be speedy, Noam has a contract 100 years on earth...
Whomest thy mans is this
MegaShiney99 noam Chomsky. He's an a anarcho syndicalist and a scholared linguist.
BadSportsLobby Tv he's obviously referring to the French guy who won't shut the fuck up
Mr Frenchman.
Close mouth.
Open ears.
Listen and learn.
Ellie Carlson Amazing. It's as if you didn't listen to anything that was said.
Ellie Carlson There's no "perfecting" the language- it's either on or off. That was Chomsky's point. By "language" he doesn't mean German or French or whatever- he means the ability of humans to think creatively through a system of arranging dicrete linguistic elements into infinately many configurations or assemblies. The only valid point Changeux had was that this transition could have happened elsewhere in the evolutionary branching- but that is uncertain. All of your other comparisons to technology and something about evolution not being possible without it are completely mistifying.
Ellie Carlson there is no such thing as the "beginning stage of evolutionary process", whatever that means. You misunderstand how evolution works. It doesn't begin or end anywhere. Your last comment illustrates your general confusion- no one has said there is no "potential" of using human cognitive abilities. That's different to the process of evolution. What you're doing is equivocating on evolution and it obfuscates the arguments made in the video (hence my original comment).
Ellie Carson I don't care about your beliefs, I've addressed your arguments and pointed out your misapprehensions. Then you claimed we are "not talking about the same thing" and that I am the one who's confused without addressing any specifics. You are not thinking clearly.
Changeux has great points.
The guy with the French accent makes very interesting points throughout, these are not taken up by Chomsky either. I would love to hear a straight out debate with these two where each is speaking their native language. The other guy makes a point about prehistoric history being unavailable to us and Chomsky starts up " all humans have the capacity for arithmetic..." (12:16). A bit of a super-slow rant, hardly patients at all, as others suggest. If humans are so *ucken dynamic and creative why are we marching into the precipice of environmental disaster while we are picking our teeth in front of a computer screen. Capitalism has us worn out and no new philosophy since Hegel. At least the Neanderthals didn't bring the world down around them when they went underground. Huh! Ah! Bah!
his interloquotor is just obtuse
Classic example of bad form in communication!
Human language is only special because its the only one we can understand. If we were Dolphins, Dolphin language would be special. Humans for the most part,certainly not Mr Chomsky, are not intelligent nor aware enough to comprehend all the languages of Earth life.
With that said, though, it seems though we had alien help.
Why do people always undermine human intelligence? No, Dolphin's aren't as smart as humans. They don't have complex economic systems, write books, record history, build spacecraft, or power computers with solar energy. Dolphin language may be special, but is still rudimentary compared to the vastly evolved human communication.
Dolphins dont have a language in the technical sense, they have a mode of communication. Humans do too, but the purpose of language is not communication, its to help us understand and rationalize the world and make decisions that ensure our survival.
This French guy is annoyance being embodied