Main points chapter 2

1. Main points chapter 2 (from class discussions) • 1a Complex animal behaviour can be applied to robots • 1b Robots are procedural, no prior considerations of its own behaviour, no decision making, no reliance on psychology. • 2a. Must be able to prioritise without getting into unrecoverable debt. • 2b. Efficiency must be considered, there is a tradeoff between energy refuelling and time spent working.

2. Chapter 3 (from class discussions) 1a The mind is a black box; it is difficult to unambigously determine its state based on its behaviour alone. 1b There are many interpretations of animal behaviour, but we can never be sure what animals actually think 2a The three intentional stances: design, physical, intentional can be interpreted in different ways (“degrees”) 2b Considering that a dog may have (dog-like) beliefs is not the same as anthropomorphising.

3. Abstract • - should summarise the content of your assignment as a whole. • Good example: • This paper is a criticism of ‘Darwin’s mistake: Explaining the discontinuity between human and non-human minds’. By discussing evidence omitted from the paper and new evidence collected I hope to put forward the idea that this paper needs to be taken with a pinch of salt and should not be accepted without great thought. Apart from the evidence provided I include various references to the open peer community which responded heavily to this paper. Also a quick review of the layout, wording and originality of the paper is included in this criticism.

4. Introduction • Say what you’re going to say … • Good example – says what’s going to be said, but also catches the reader’s interest – • When an article is released, claiming that one of the greatest scientific minds of all time was mistaken, it is likely to be met with scepticism. It’s entirely possible than an even greater genius has come along to free us from ignorance, but 99 times out of 100 it’ll just be a way to get noticed. In the following analysis of Penn et al’s “Darwin’s mistake: Explaining the discontinuity between human and nonhuman minds”, I attempt to determine whether the theories put forward by this potential genius are worthy of the attention sought by their title.

5. Organisation • Good introduction and conclusion • Coherence – building up an argument, • Part of this is remembering (and referring back) to what you said earlier.

6. Conclusion • Reflect back on what you have said • Good example – • Overall, it appears that Penn et al are presenting a paper which they consider to be controversial without fully considering the arguments and conclusion they have put forward. Their paper presents itself (as) a fast paced review of research in the field without going into depth into any particular area and also rushes its conclusion. I believe that the authors could have presented a much more convincing paper if they had instead focused on one or two of the eight areas of cognition they address. The authors do little to introduce their paper in terms of its aims and little to conclude it, making the paper appear as little more than a reinterpretation of past research which attempts to distinguish itself by presenting the information under a “controversial” subtext. Perhaps Penn et al’s hast and conclusion that a lack of evidence shows that there is evidence of an absence is best summed by McGonigle and Chalmers (2008) in their criticism when they say that the “discontinuity as well as continuity in the (nonlinear) evolution of cognitive systems is hardly news” and that “In an exciting area still largely in a vacuum created more by experimental neglect rather than animal failures, this rush to judgement by Penn et al will put this fragile yet exciting new comparative agenda at risk”.

7. Cited in … • Reference schemes number in text – then each number is a reference at the end (organised alphabetically, or in order they occur in text). Or name and date in text, and then full references provided at the end

8. Physical Symbol System Hypothesis • A physical symbol system is a necessary and sufficient condition for an intelligent system • Newell and Simon 1975 • Core concept in Artificial Intelligence • A physical symbol system: "consists of a set of entities, called symbols, which are physical patterns that can occur as components of another type of entity called an expression (or symbol structure). Thus, a symbol structure is composed of a number of instances (or tokens) of symbols related in some physical way (such as one token being next to another). At any instant of time the system will contain a collection of these symbol structures. Besides these structures, the system also contains a collection of processes that operate on expressions to produce other expressions: processes of creation, modification, reproduction and destruction. A physical symbol system is a machine that produces through time an evolving collection of symbol structures. Such a system exists in a world of objects wider than just these symbolic expressions themselves."

9. A physical symbol system takes physical patterns (symbols) combining them, and manipulating them to form new expressions. • Claim implies human thought is symbol processing, and also that machines can be intelligent (because they can manipulate symbols).

10. Criticisms include: • Dreyfus, and knowledge like riding a bicycle that can’t be captured in rules and symbols • Searle and Chinese room –symbols need to be grounded in the real world to have meaning • Brooks and ‘the world is its own best model’, and focus on abilities of simpler organisms and robots that can move and survive without symbols.