tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34641463.post8865678851582734049..comments2023-09-19T05:55:33.259+01:00Comments on Paul E. Baxter: Internal Representations: a metaphorAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05470909914174062331noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34641463.post-10878736247043129882008-01-11T15:02:00.000+00:002008-01-11T15:02:00.000+00:00Interesting post. If I could put labels on your me...Interesting post. If I could put labels on your metaphorical categories, they could be:<BR/><BR/>active<BR/>passive<BR/>blended (active/passive)<BR/><BR/>I'm also reminded of bottom-up vs. top-down processes, as well as learning approaches (supervised, unsupervised, reinforcement).<BR/><BR/>The metaphor seems like it might be a useful conceptualization. The active/passive distinction also made meDerekhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02776917750757825408noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34641463.post-34235055955062816462008-01-11T11:02:00.000+00:002008-01-11T11:02:00.000+00:00I am mostly with the previous commenter -- that is...I am mostly with the previous commenter -- that is, I believe that an "internal representation" is, for conscious grown adults a representation is a lot more than just a slightly actively modified imprint. The metaphor only works for things you have never encountered before and which you cannot integrate into previous experience, i.e. can not connect with other internal representations.<BR/><BR/>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34641463.post-7808830091342362772008-01-10T17:56:00.000+00:002008-01-10T17:56:00.000+00:00Just re-reading my position as stated, it would ap...Just re-reading my position as stated, it would appear that I actually disagree with your opening statement, precisely because I agree with your reasoning!Pat Parslowhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02506915711552549107noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34641463.post-69577000492290796972008-01-10T17:54:00.000+00:002008-01-10T17:54:00.000+00:00I think I am more or less with you on this. Exten...I think I am more or less with you on this. Extensive internal representations are probably not even necessary for cognition if the subject of the process is within your perceptual grasp, but the ability to create detailed representations within the 'mind' are, presumably, necessary to reason about things which are absent, or abstract.<BR/><BR/>I must admit, I tend to think of the internal Pat Parslowhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02506915711552549107noreply@blogger.com