Yes, and Tooby and Cosmides ended up on the wrong side of the argument with Tversky and Kahneman about to what degree biases are contextually adaptive rather than reflective of computational limits.
That seems reasonable.
In your opinion, are they right about to what degree human intelligence is dominated by domain-specific modules, and that that’s a consequence of combinatorial explosion and the frame problem? Since reading it yesterday some of my barely conscious assumptions about intelligence have evaporated and I’ve started seeing words like “intelligence” and “learning” to be acting as curiosity-stoppers in many contexts. Thanks.
Yes, and Tooby and Cosmides ended up on the wrong side of the argument with Tversky and Kahneman about to what degree biases are contextually adaptive rather than reflective of computational limits.
That seems reasonable.
In your opinion, are they right about to what degree human intelligence is dominated by domain-specific modules, and that that’s a consequence of combinatorial explosion and the frame problem? Since reading it yesterday some of my barely conscious assumptions about intelligence have evaporated and I’ve started seeing words like “intelligence” and “learning” to be acting as curiosity-stoppers in many contexts. Thanks.