Siri don't parse

Siri is a natural language interface for the Apple iPhone 4S. It stands for Speech Interpretation and Recognition Interface and can answer your questions or make recommendations by delegating your requests to services on the web [ wiki link ]

Siri can’t parse pragmatics. The literal and rule-based contents of speech (semantics and syntax) are no problem. But the pragmatic content that’s supplied by context and culture is beyond Siri. However, roughly two-thirds of human communication requires intuiting one anothers meaning on a pragmatic basis [ thesis ]. We are pretty good at striking a balance between how specific and how general we need to be in order to keep the conversation rolling ..without either getting bogged down or sounding incomprehensible [ link ]. Computers on the other hand can’t do this. So, half the time I expect Siri to be either clueless ..or respond in gibberish.

Expectation-based perception

The journal Nature reports that expectation of a sensory event can increase the speed and accuracy we perceive it [ link ]. “Animals are not passive spectators of the sensory world in which they live. In natural conditions they often sense objects on the bases of expectations initiated by predictive cues. Expectation profoundly modulates neural activity by altering the background state of cortical networks and modulating sensory processing” [ link ].

Expectations alter perception ..I know this from my own practice. Expectations amplify and channel speech perception. Listeners have to take a moment to adjust when speakers say something that defies expectation. This study shows that the same holds true for taste. In one sense experiences arrive one by one, always fresh and new, but over time they become familiar re-enactments of prior experience. For instance I like yogurt for breakfast ..so I say it’s good and look forward to it when I get up in the morning. Good is a property I supply as something I experienced so long ago I don’t remember. It’s no longer fresh and new but an experience that my expectations enhance.

PTSD

Researchers in Europe have found that a gene, linked to improved memory performance ..also increases susceptibility to PTSD [ link ] “..in dramatic fashion, a gene variant responsible for differences in brain activity during memory encoding can also lead to increased risk of developing PTSD in response to catastrophe.” According to Neurobiologist James McGaugh at the University of California, Irvine “It’s well known that emotional arousal enhances memory consolidation, which can be a contributing factor to PTSD ..these findings provide genetic support for this hypothesis.”

Losing my religion

“This study applied a dual-processing model of [the mind] to show that analytic reasoning overrides flawed intuition and diminishes religious belief” -Gervais  [ link ].

I’m no mystic but I believe there’s a flaw in this logic. Claiming that analytic reasoning supercedes intuitive thinking is a false comparison. Analytic reasoning is not native; it is an acquired skill. It doesn’t have it’s own ‘processing system’ in the brain. The mind is a hybrid and analytic reasoning is just one of many ways of knowing. Discovery and invention come about just as often by integration and ‘insight’. Navigating unfamiliar territory is faster by seeing the relationship between vague and loosely-connected information than by using step-by-step analysis [ link ].

 

Analytic reasoning takes practice and devotion to it means neglecting other skills. When I consider all the technical writing I’ve done that required logical analysis; it’s a wonder I can suspend critical thinking long enough to accept things as they are. This may be dangerous. Invention takes a creative leap - a vision outside the confines of analytic thought. I do feel that technical writing has been stifling. For instance, after working on predicate-based software for so long (the kind that runs on legacy systems); it took me a while to grasp the more intuitive-based ‘object-software’ - which are the ‘apps’ that power devices running on the Internet today. After all, this was a sea-change brought about by the invention of Mitch Kapor and the vision of Steve Jobs. Neither of them knew for sure what the pay-off would be. It required a leap of faith.