:BlobCatRainbow: updated our (@andrea) connectionist preprint with some improvements due to great feedback on some points, e.g. refinement of the point on how concepts like "neurobiological plausibility" and so-called "bridge laws" are sadly nonsense (see extracts below from section 2.1, and PDF for full: https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/eaf2z)

‼️ new preprint out with @andrea on connectionism: the framework that uses artificial neural networks to model human cognition: we split it into Modern and Classical (see figure) to show how the (meta)theoretical commitments (see table) changed dramatically after 2010. read more here; I am too tired (unrelated reasons) to say more right now, but will return soon: https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/eaf2z

The amazing @Iris, Marcela S., Barbara M. & I build towards (sadly not obv to all):

"Universities are not spokespersons for the AI industry. On the contrary, we need to resist being coopted and corrupted by the industries’ agendas."

https://rcsc.substack.com/p/critical-ai-literacy-beyond-hegemonic

I have a problem with people who know full well how LLMs work using anthropomorphising words for them, such as "reason", "think", "understand"... You are invigorating the hype!

@IncredulousMike @rhelune this is what dog piling is and the idea that a mod is transphobic isn't some impossible claim like a UFO sighting lmfao calm down

@anne_twain @asurprenant yes, that too! Also see @Iris work with me and others here: van Rooij, I., Guest, O., Adolfi, F. G., de Haan, R., Kolokolova, A., & Rich, P. (2024). Reclaiming AI as a theoretical tool for cognitive science. Computational Brain & Behavior. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42113-024-00217-5

d) how we treat mind as substance or as computer, mixing and matching to suit rhetorical ends in violation of computationalism;

e) how to address this, by being open about our beliefs about mind and brain, and aware of what they bind us to.

Might continue later, but this is a good overview. Enjoy! 🙃

3/n @Iris

Specifically, we define & analyse:
a) what reverse engineering is in the true case & as adopted by cognitive scientists;

b) true reverse engineering: Chinese porcelain reverse engineered by European alchemists & Jesuit missionaries; & IBM’s System 360 reverse engineered by the USSR (Table 1);

c) how reverse engineering of substances in its appeal to correlation and structural similarity appears as if it provides the right frame (pink column, Table 2);

@Iris 2/n

I've felt for a while that a mainstream method, reverse engineering, in cognitive science & AI is incompatible w computationalism‼️ So I wrote "Modern Alchemy: Neurocognitive Reverse Engineering" w the wonderful Natalia Scharfenberg & @Iris to elaborate: https://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/25289/

1/n

"The Executive Board (CvB) of Radboud University has proven its inability to lead by endangering its students multiple times, its eagerness to call the police on its own students, its complete lack of accountability, & its open hostility toward students who protest their policy.

The CvB is responsible for multiple wrongful detentions in prison, illegal spying on students, a police dog mauling a student’s leg, breaking another student’s kneecap, & injuring many more."

https://chng.it/GDk7n2nn2n

@djoerd thank you

"Urgent plea to Dutch higher education institutions: Cut ties with genocide and refuse police on campus!"

https://openletter.earth/nederlandse-wetenschappers-herhalen-dringende-boodschap-aan-bestuurders-van-het-hoger-onderwijs-verbreek-de-banden-met-genocide-en-haal-de-politie-niet-naar-de-campus-7b83166a

If you aren’t using AI, you run a very real risk of falling behind in the race to produce voluminous mediocrity while slowly forgetting how to do your own job.

"Urgent plea to Dutch higher education institutions: Cut ties with genocide and refuse police on campus!"

https://openletter.earth/nederlandse-wetenschappers-herhalen-dringende-boodschap-aan-bestuurders-van-het-hoger-onderwijs-verbreek-de-banden-met-genocide-en-haal-de-politie-niet-naar-de-campus-7b83166a

@anne_twain @asurprenant yes, that too! Also see @Iris work with me and others here: van Rooij, I., Guest, O., Adolfi, F. G., de Haan, R., Kolokolova, A., & Rich, P. (2024). Reclaiming AI as a theoretical tool for cognitive science. Computational Brain & Behavior. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42113-024-00217-5

NEW paper! 💭🖥️

“Combining Psychology with Artificial Intelligence: What could possibly go wrong?”

— Brief review paper by @olivia Guest and myself, highlighting traps to avoid when combining Psych with AI, and why this is so important. Check out our proposed way forward! 🌟💡

Full paper: https://osf.io/preprints/psyarxiv/aue4m

@asurprenant @Iris yes, thank you for the kind words! And yes, it starts from a little gut feeling something that maybe something is a bit off...

d) how we treat mind as substance or as computer, mixing and matching to suit rhetorical ends in violation of computationalism;

e) how to address this, by being open about our beliefs about mind and brain, and aware of what they bind us to.

Might continue later, but this is a good overview. Enjoy! 🙃

3/n @Iris

Specifically, we define & analyse:
a) what reverse engineering is in the true case & as adopted by cognitive scientists;

b) true reverse engineering: Chinese porcelain reverse engineered by European alchemists & Jesuit missionaries; & IBM’s System 360 reverse engineered by the USSR (Table 1);

c) how reverse engineering of substances in its appeal to correlation and structural similarity appears as if it provides the right frame (pink column, Table 2);

@Iris 2/n

I've felt for a while that a mainstream method, reverse engineering, in cognitive science & AI is incompatible w computationalism‼️ So I wrote "Modern Alchemy: Neurocognitive Reverse Engineering" w the wonderful Natalia Scharfenberg & @Iris to elaborate: https://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/25289/

1/n