When you wrote that a grounding maps atoms to ” concepts in a world W”, I assumed you were talking about an abstract world that was not necessarily the real world. If I had to pick one of the many ways that it falls short of describing humans* to criticize, I’d go with “fails to implement learning”.
* which is just fine given that it seeks to define a necessary but not sufficient conditions for consciousness.
I’m surprised no one has come up with the objection that we believe things that aren’t true. That’s a tough one to handle.
When you wrote that a grounding maps atoms to ” concepts in a world W”, I assumed you were talking about an abstract world that was not necessarily the real world. If I had to pick one of the many ways that it falls short of describing humans* to criticize, I’d go with “fails to implement learning”.
* which is just fine given that it seeks to define a necessary but not sufficient conditions for consciousness.