the conjecture is False... there're c'zillions of calculations, all occurring
in-parallel, all the time... convergence upon verbal symbols happens only
relatively-rarely... but one can go into the "deep"-calculation place if one,
first, Learns how to do that... still can't attach verbal symbols to
everything in real-time, but everything's available for one's Observation...
it's why I like to communicate via "pictures"... which =can= be "drawn" with
verbal symbols... and which =can= be Explored, all their
c'zillions-of-calculations-stuff intact, by others. ken collins
Gary Jasdzewski wrote:
> Recently I posted to this group a question about the reasons why cognitive
> scientists (linguists, psychologists, etc.) should pay attention to the
> neurosciences. I haven't received many replies, sad to say. However, I
> did run across an idea called the '100 step constraint' in a marvelous
> book called _Speaking Minds_. The idea is that the brain is not fast
> enough to perform more than 100 computations in something like 300
> milliseconds, and so any cognitive theory must take this into account. Is
> anyone familiar with this idea? Is it well known in your field? What are
> the numbers used to calculate it?
>> --
> gary jasdzewski
>gary at siu.edu>http://omni.cc.purdue.edu/~garyjaz
