|
|
|
|
|
by ppod
1632 days ago
|
|
I agree with the other comments in here: this article takes several complex, long-running debates (modularity vs connectionism, predictive vs feedforward processing, dualism/monism) and reduces them to simplistic flamebait answers that come down definitively on one side. It's really the worst kind of popular science writing, because it's overconfident and dismissive of the opposing view rather then separating the debate out into appropriate parts that can be tackled with evidence-based research. |
|