implementable theory of mind culture and activity l.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Implementable theory of mind, culture and activity PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Implementable theory of mind, culture and activity

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 23

Implementable theory of mind, culture and activity - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 175 Views
  • Uploaded on

Implementable theory of mind, culture and activity. Why? To implement computer models of human creativity, learning and problem solving e.g. story generation program To inform design of systems to support learning and knowledge working e.g. tutoring system.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Implementable theory of mind, culture and activity' - findlay


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
implementable theory of mind culture and activity
Implementable theory of mind, culture and activity

Why?

To implement computer models of human creativity, learning and problem solving

e.g. story generation program

To inform design of systems to support learning and knowledge working

e.g. tutoring system

vygotsky and cognitive science frawley 1997 mit press
Vygotsky and Cognitive Science(Frawley,1997, MIT Press)

“Why should the social and computational mind go together?”

  • They often study the same problems
    • Context, creativity, development, consciousness, metacognition
  • They complement each other
    • Cognitive science needs a rich theory of mind in society
    • Sociocultural theory would benefit from an implementable theory of mind
  • Each can be read in terms of the other
    • There is nothing intrinsically noncomputational about sociocultural mind, and nothing inherently asocial about machines.
    • “Vygotsky proposed a protocybernetic account of mental processes”
sociocomputationalism
Sociocomputationalism
  • About how the world is in the computational mind
  • Binding between an organism and the world affords unified stretches of experience (‘the world in the mind’)
  • The world itself is not the model, but rather the effectively computed world
  • The focus of sociocomputationalism is on how the world affords effectively computed activity
  • Not all aspects of the world are sociocomputationally effective. The effective aspects have a role in the language for processing.
  • “Sociocomputationalism is an account of the details of the opportunistic environmental control of thinking by certain aspects of language”
sociocomputationalism my interpretation
Sociocomputationalism (my interpretation)
  • A cybernetic not a symbolic computational theory
  • About external and internal constraint, interaction, dynamic control, and how the external is internalised
  • Language as mediation for (self and social) regulation
language for mediation
Language for mediation

Visibility

Lesion visible

Location

Cortical grey matter

Cerebral white matter

Periventricular

Margin

Graded

Shape

Irregular

Interior pattern

Unstructured heterogeneous

Size

Large

Intensity

Hyperintense

Other signs

Mass effect

metarepresentation frawley
Metarepresentation (Frawley)
  • Metaconsciousness is higher-order thought but not a data-structure, not a representation of another representation, but rather an awareness of a representation as a representation, originating in the socio-cultural resources for reflexivity, chiefly speech.
  • Two aspects to metarepresentation: content and bracketing
  • Content: a language to describe and refer to thought
  • Bracketing: a decoupling of the primary representation from reality into an imaginary situation (e.g. “this pencil is like a spacecraft”)
  • Autism is bracketing without content – a language for thought (perhaps overdeveloped) with a disrupted language of thought.
socio computational architectures frawley
Socio-computational architectures (Frawley)
  • Need an architecture that “might accommodate explicit, self-reflexive focusing”
  • One that gives a role to higher thinking not as problem solving per se but as its management.
  • Central role to contextualised control of thought – both internal and external contextualisation
conversation theory gordon pask
Conversation Theory(Gordon Pask)
  • A domain independent theory of the processes of coming to how
  • Not a theory of cognition, but of interaction, theory construction and communication
  • Derived from cybernetics
  • Radical constructivist epistemology
  • The cybernetic theory of conversations.
  • A conversation is the minimum necessary structure to enable learning
radical constructivism
Radical constructivism
  • Systems theory, concerned with the coupling of organisms and environment
  • Radical constructivists “have taken seriously…the concept of knowledge as an adaptive function”
  • Cognition enables us to cope with the world of experience (rather than providing an “objective” representation of an external world)
  • Cognition as an evolutionary, self-organising process
  • Members of a species create shared ecological niches and consensual domains of interaction and communication.
  • The “models” an organism constructs as a result of adaptation are tacit.
  • “Gaining knowledge” is not the storing of representations, but the process of “coming to know”
radical constructivism and language
Radical constructivism and language
  • Conversation is not the exchange of knowledge, but the process of becoming informed about each other’s “informings”
  • The “coordination of coordinations of coordinations”
  • Higher level coordinations are “tokens” for lower-level coordinations, (objects and events), which are themselves tokens for stabilities of sensori-motor activity and “structural coupling” with the environment
pask s contribution
Pask’s contribution
  • Distinction between “psychological (p-) individuals” and “mechanical (m-) individuals”
  • There is no one to one correspondence between m- and p- individuals.
  • Consciousness is a property of a p-individual (a system that may potentially “know with itself”) not an m-individual.
  • The participants in a conversation are p-individuals. The conversation itself is a p-individual.
  • A conversation is the minimum necessary system (p-individual) that can learn
slide12

Conversation TheoryG. Pask (1975) ‘Minds and media in education and entertainment: some theoretical comments illustrated by the design and operation of a system for exteriorizing and manipulating individual theses’, in R. Trappl and G. Pask (eds.) Progress in Cybernetics and Systems Research IV, Wiley.

L language able to accommodate commands, questions, instructions

Mind organization expressed in L which, if set in motion, gives rise to thought, feeling or behaviour [very broad definition of mind! - includes e.g. theatre scripts, manifestos]

Medium processor in which a mind is realized (including brains, computing machines, machinery of theatrical production, political parties)

Individual the activity or motion permitted by an L nameable and personally pronominalized chunk of mind, such that, if it is realized and executed, its motion comprises a (logically) coherent set of beliefs. (Personalities, characters in plays, socio-political factions, if realized and executed in brains, actors, collections of brains, yield people, enactments of characters, cultures)

pask distributed cognition in action
Pask – Distributed Cognition in Action

“There is no need to see minds as neatly encapsulated in brains connected by a network of channels called ‘the media’ ... I am inviting the reader to try out a different point of view; namely the image of a pervasive medium (or media) inhabited by minds in motion. Thus, media are characterized as computing systems, albeit of a peculiar kind. In our present state of knowledge it seems prudent to regard the media as heterogeneous, and rendered modular by the existence of specially unrestricted regions (brains, for example) capable of acting as L processors (though I have a hankering to imagine these regions are ultimately determned by programmatic rather than concrete localization). It is surely true that rather powerful computerized systems greatly reduce the differentiation of the medium and coalesce the specially unrestricted nodules, so that ‘interface barriers’ are less obtrusive than they used to be.”

Organisms

Media

Individuals

Communcation

as channels of communication

as program sharing and linguistic interaction

between individuals. Medium (M) as shading

rescher s two cycle model
Rescher’s two-cycle model

Why?

Metaphysical assumptions

Theoretical interpretations

Conceptual systems

How?

Models

Methods

Procedures

Application

Correction by coherence

Pragmatic correction

conversational framework after pask
Conversational framework (after Pask)

Facility for mediating agreements

Offers theories and ideas

Re-describes theories

Teacher demonstrates or elicits models and problem solutions

Learner acts to build models and solve problems

Why questions and responses

Offers conceptions and explanations

Re-describes conceptions

Sets goals

Adjusts model

Teacher demonstrates or elicits models and problem solutions

Learner acts to build models and solve problems

How questions and responses

Acts

Modifies actions

Facility for practical model building

and problem solving

slide16
The inception of a spontaneous concept can usually be traced to a face-to-face meeting with a concrete situation, while a scientific concept involves from the first a ‘mediated’ attitude towards its object.

Vygotsky, Language and Thought (cited in Laurillard)

exteriorising agreements
Exteriorising agreements

“In research (and in effective tutorial operations, also) understanding must be exteriorized for observation... To exteriorize an understanding means to establish a multilevel agreement between [individuals] A, B ... with respect of a topic T. ... The concrete equipment in which A and B model derivations [agreements] ... is also a medium. The composite medium couples the media, namely brain(s), in a conversation designed to elicit understanding.”

external representations pask
External Representations (Pask)

“It seems clear that there must be great advantages in providing both participants with an external representation of the subject matter through which topics can be identified and discussed. In this way, explanation can be initiated by either participant.”

external representations
External Representations

An external representation is a construct that

a) mediates conversation on a topic

b) is invested with meaning [models agreements]

a full learning conversation
A full learning conversation
  • Conversation about the how and why of a topic
  • Conversation about the how of learning (for example discussing study skills and reflecting on experiences as a learner)
  • Conversation about purposes, the why of learning, where the emphasis is on encouraging personal autonomy and accepting responsibility for one’s own learning
the complexity of coming to know laurillard
The complexity of coming to know(Laurillard)

For learning to success, the student must:

  • Apprehend the structure of the discourse
  • Interpret the forms of representation
  • Act on descriptions of the world
  • Adjust actions to fit the task goals
  • Adjust descriptions to fit the topic goal
  • Reflect on the cycle of goal, action, feedback

For Pask, understanding a topic means that the learner can ‘teachback’ the topic by providing both non-verbal demonstrations and verbal explanations of ‘how’ and ‘why’

learning technology after pask
Learning technology (after Pask)

Technology provides facility for mediating agreements

Offers theories and ideas

Re-describes theories

Technology demonstrates or elicits models and problem solutions

Learner acts to build models and solve problems

Why questions and responses

Offers conceptions and explanations

Re-describes conceptions

Sets goals

Adjusts model

Technology demonstrates or elicits models and problem solutions

Learner acts to build models and solve problems

How questions and responses

Acts

Modifies actions

Technology provides facility for practical model building

and problem solving

implementable theory of mind culture and activity23
Implementable theory of mind, culture and activity

To inform the design of computer models of human creativity, learning and problem solving

Model of writing as creative design, informed the design of MEXICA

To inform design of systems to support learning and knowledge working

Laurillard’s framework for the design of learning technologies