I am astounded at the way RUclips is so brilliant at sending me the right thing at the right time lately. Thank you for doing this. Things will be fine.
coreycox2345 I imagine RUclips uses an algorithm which looks at what you watch, then extrapolates this information and selects related content to your viewing habits.
coreycox2345 I think there's some truth in Jung's concept of synchronicity - well, from what I can gather from it. Turns out our scientific knowledge hasn't really advanced or made new discoverers basically since Newton showed gravity is not a causal contact science. I guess we're back full circle: metaphysics.
It seems counter intuitive to say that something finite like a brain can produce an infinite number of possible outcomes. I think it helps to think of "infinite" in the sense that, no matter how many outcomes we have created so far, there will always be more possibilities. Rather than thinking of it as an unimaginably huge number, it is just something that never ends.
i really enjoy chomskys books about his general political ideas, are there any books that give an overview about the stuff in the video? like linguistics, and the mind in general?
At about 16:15 , re the Arno River, how can we be surprised that the effect of words resemble clouds much more than they resemble crystals? I mean, given the fact that in our brains, the average number of synapses modulating the discharge frequency of the receiving neuron is somewhere between thirty thousand and four hundred thousand. That seems to me to allow for a huge range of meaning to be metaphorized in the frequency but also with a very high resolution on the subtlety possible. The above sentences will make sense after the reader accepts the proposition that the neural discharge frequency is the means by which metaphors are encoded and every neuron that participates in thinking is maintaining a metaphor (which might also be called a thought except I suspect that in most cases it takes a multitude of metaphors to constitute a thought).
Full disclosure: He is my Linguistic Hero. However, I do enjoy catching him in the odd grammatical mistake: "....Every person develops in their minds....". (4:35) Classic Pronoun/Antecedent error. Yeah, I got a lot of time on my hands. LOL.
Yes, but he continued on from what Jespersen had said, assuming it was paraphrased- “every person develops in their minds, somehow, what he called a ‘Notion of Structure”. Universally, Chomsky is referring to the concept of the ‘developing thought’ of a particular structure, in this case, the internal process of grammar. So to say “develops in their minds…” isn’t exactly a mistake in this context.
I'm confused with whole this " creating novel expression" evidence. People actually very rarely produce new expressions. With how many new words did any of us came today? Same thing with phrases. To me, it look like we are just repeating ourself much of the time. Chomsky also. I have watched couple of dozens of his videos, read few of his books, and yes, he speaks the same thing in every of them.
Mate Lesko I think he means by novel, new expressions over an infinite range is in principle possible; even if as you rightly say, we might not in everyday regular life utter or conceive anything novel. The 'novel' creative aspect is potentially present, I think is what is meant.
How many times have you written those exact words before? How many times have you seen those exact words in that exact order written by someone else? That's what he means; that we are able to construct and understand infinitely variable arrangements of words without having been exposed to those exact arrangements previously.
"Science is like sex: sometimes something useful comes out, but that is not the reason we are doing it. ”
― Richard P. Feynman
I am astounded at the way RUclips is so brilliant at sending me the right thing at the right time lately. Thank you for doing this. Things will be fine.
coreycox2345
I imagine RUclips uses an algorithm which looks at what you watch, then extrapolates this information and selects related content to your viewing habits.
Oh that's what's going on, I thought it was magic .
Davemac1116 It has been working well...whatever is behind it. Sinchronicity. I love when that happens.
coreycox2345 I think there's some truth in Jung's concept of synchronicity - well, from what I can gather from it. Turns out our scientific knowledge hasn't really advanced or made new discoverers basically since Newton showed gravity is not a causal contact science. I guess we're back full circle: metaphysics.
coreycox2345 Thank Algorithms!
It seems counter intuitive to say that something finite like a brain can produce an infinite number of possible outcomes. I think it helps to think of "infinite" in the sense that, no matter how many outcomes we have created so far, there will always be more possibilities. Rather than thinking of it as an unimaginably huge number, it is just something that never ends.
One of his best talks
its on the top1000 for sure :D
Thanks for bursting my bubble
thanks for posting! I would love to know, where did you source this from? where does one find these kind of materials?
i really enjoy chomskys books about his general political ideas, are there any books that give an overview about the stuff in the video? like linguistics, and the mind in general?
Here's one: www.amazon.com/New-Horizons-Study-Language-Mind/dp/0521658225
Here's the rest: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noam_Chomsky_bibliography_and_filmography
thanks! ordered some.
At about 16:15 , re the Arno River, how can we be surprised that the effect of words resemble clouds much more than they resemble crystals?
I mean, given the fact that in our brains, the average number of synapses modulating the discharge frequency of the receiving neuron is somewhere between thirty thousand and four hundred thousand.
That seems to me to allow for a huge range of meaning to be metaphorized in the frequency but also with a very high resolution on the subtlety possible.
The above sentences will make sense after the reader accepts the proposition that the neural discharge frequency is the means by which metaphors are encoded and every neuron that participates in thinking is maintaining a metaphor (which might also be called a thought except I suspect that in most cases it takes a multitude of metaphors to constitute a thought).
Why would she use only a 🔧 wrench is the real🤨 question to fully perceive in the language process.
Great stuff btw
Does anyone know which chemistry experiment he is referring to in the beginning? Or who conducted the experiment?
What is the experiment he mentions around 03.10? - the origin of chemistry?
I just read about this in an introduction to Lavoisier's Elements. If anyone wants me to dig up the experiment just give me a reply.
Full disclosure: He is my Linguistic Hero. However, I do enjoy catching him in the odd grammatical mistake: "....Every person develops in their minds....". (4:35)
Classic Pronoun/Antecedent error.
Yeah, I got a lot of time on my hands. LOL.
Yes, but he continued on from what Jespersen had said, assuming it was paraphrased- “every person develops in their minds, somehow, what he called a ‘Notion of Structure”. Universally, Chomsky is referring to the concept of the ‘developing thought’ of a particular structure, in this case, the internal process of grammar. So to say “develops in their minds…” isn’t exactly a mistake in this context.
I'm confused with whole this " creating novel expression" evidence. People actually very rarely produce new expressions. With how many new words did any of us came today? Same thing with phrases. To me, it look like we are just repeating ourself much of the time. Chomsky also. I have watched couple of dozens of his videos, read few of his books, and yes, he speaks the same thing in every of them.
Speak for yourself, I read the dictionary .
Which books did you read where he says the same thing ? I don't believe you've read his books , I think you're lying .
Mate Lesko
I think he means by novel, new expressions over an infinite range is in principle possible; even if as you rightly say, we might not in everyday regular life utter or conceive anything novel. The 'novel' creative aspect is potentially present, I think is what is meant.
While the words aren't novel, in most cases, your sentences are pretty novel.
How many times have you written those exact words before? How many times have you seen those exact words in that exact order written by someone else? That's what he means; that we are able to construct and understand infinitely variable arrangements of words without having been exposed to those exact arrangements previously.
Person coughing the whole time in background is awful
wtf are they supposed to do 😭