Gary Marcus

Rank 14 of 47
|
Score 99
6/16/2025, 10:28:43 PM
X
In reply to:
David Leiser دافيد דויד
@Professologue
·
29d
@GaryMarcus @rao2z Piagetian epistemology has a lot to offer, but I did not stress that too much because it is virtually unknown. Yet these deeper questions have been discussed by the likes of Papert, Kuhn, McCulloch and a few others
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
29d
@Professologue @rao2z fits with a lot of what i have been arguing for a long time, and makes sense
David Leiser دافيد דויד
@Professologue
·
29d
@GaryMarcus @rao2z
David Leiser دافيد דויד
@Professologue
·
29d
Structural understanding is not optional for General AI. It is the foundation. Without coherence undergirding performance, systems will keep producing fluent outputs — and unacceptable errors. *No structure without genesis. No genesis without structure*(Piaget)
David Leiser دافيد דויד
@Professologue
·
29d
Scaling alone won’t yield structured understanding. What’s needed isn’t more capacity, but a capacity of a different kind: the ability to reorganise one’s own representations, not just extend them.
David Leiser دافيد דויד
@Professologue
·
29d
As models grow more complex, interpretability has become a major concern. We now have attention maps, saliency methods, attribution graphs. These tools show how outputs were shaped — but not whether they reflect any coherent internal structure.

The statement is part of a broader discussion on the application of Piagetian epistemology to AI, which constitutes public discourse as it engages with the public issue of AI development and understanding. The tone is analytical and reflects a personal opinion on the applicability of Piaget's concepts.

  1. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    The statement engages in constructive criticism by expressing a personal opinion on Piaget's concepts without resorting to personal attacks or ad hominem arguments. It acknowledges the framing used by another participant in the discussion, indicating a willingness to engage in dialogue. [+1]