These do not strike me as failures to replicate human brains:
the question “name one person who is not a barbaric Mongol warlord” would still return “Genghis Khan”
Name an object that isn’t a jar of peanut butter. What did you immediately think of? (Yeah, you correct afterward. But still, I’d be more likely to blurt out “Genghis Khan” than to the question “Name one person”.)
you can convince the toy network McDonalds is your best dining choice just by saying its name a lot
The problem as I understand it is precisely that the spreading activation model doesn’t include any natural way of doing that filtering.
Well, it may not be obvious how the error correction works, but it still explains the part that generate the hypotheses to be chosen.
This is similar to the stroop effect, and from studying that kind of stuff, they’ve figured out which part of the brain (ACC) actually does the error correction. Since it’s a completely separate part of the brain that handles error correction, there’s no reason to think that the part that generates the errors works differently.
Name an object that isn’t a jar of peanut butter. What did you immediately think of?
An elephant. Due to the fact that the question that’s usually asked is about elephants. So I thought of elephants before I finished the sentence
Second, I thought of a jar of peanut butter.
I still haven’t consciously thought of another object yet, except just now as I was thinking about what object I might think of, and thought of the spoon I was using to eat my food.
These do not strike me as failures to replicate human brains:
Name an object that isn’t a jar of peanut butter. What did you immediately think of? (Yeah, you correct afterward. But still, I’d be more likely to blurt out “Genghis Khan” than to the question “Name one person”.)
That’s how advertising works, isn’t it? See also believing everything we’re told and your own post on repeated affirmation.
A jar of peanut butter. Then a jar of jam. Sample size of one, but that looks a lot to me like filtering activated concepts.
The problem as I understand it is precisely that the spreading activation model doesn’t include any natural way of doing that filtering.
Well, it may not be obvious how the error correction works, but it still explains the part that generate the hypotheses to be chosen.
This is similar to the stroop effect, and from studying that kind of stuff, they’ve figured out which part of the brain (ACC) actually does the error correction. Since it’s a completely separate part of the brain that handles error correction, there’s no reason to think that the part that generates the errors works differently.
An elephant. Due to the fact that the question that’s usually asked is about elephants. So I thought of elephants before I finished the sentence
Second, I thought of a jar of peanut butter.
I still haven’t consciously thought of another object yet, except just now as I was thinking about what object I might think of, and thought of the spoon I was using to eat my food.
A jar of peanut butter. Then a knife, and then a piece of toast.