For instance, you can dream words.
For instance, you can dream words.
I'm thinking of my kid - her personality when she was tiny. I could see what it was but not explain it.
Hence I think ideas are unquestionably first and words are the inadequate and inaccurate description of thoughts that exist without them.
Still, even though I think the author is right about consciousness/concepts preceding language, I think he's wrong about the other part. The statistical models that underlie AI very much remind me of what we call a human concept. It's a statistical model of that thing, person, or idea. However, we humans seem to have this ability to create new concepts that are wildly different than our training data (what we have experienced in life), and we call this creativity. It's missing from AI for some reason. That is the part that makes me question if AI will ever match humans.
Then we may all die but at least not be crushed by the next trillionaire using machines as an instrument to manage billions of us in the way that social media manages hundreds of millions of us.
You (and TFA) are making a false dichotomy here. Yes, of course we think in images. But we also have an inner monologue that is critically important for much of our higher-level thought. How do you even write a HN comment without thinking through it in words?
Clothing enables the human body to do things it couldn't before (staying warm, protecting the skin and feet, etc), but it also couldn't exist without the human body to create it.
When I'm working through complex software design issues it's almost all abstract images/conceptual.
Testing different design approaches and options are all non-verbal, I imagine the system using abstract imagery that represents the different concepts.
OTOH sometimes saying things different ways triggers a memory so I suspect words get used in a way that anything we can sense gets used - as a sort of index or hash key to other data.