Case File
efta-02477448DOJ Data Set 11OtherEFTA02477448
Date
Unknown
Source
DOJ Data Set 11
Reference
efta-02477448
Pages
3
Persons
0
Integrity
Extracted Text (OCR)
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
From:
Noam Chomsky
Sent:
Thursday, December 24, 2015 3:52 PM
To:
Jeffrey E.
Subject:
RE: Re:
This is the program David Marr initiated, developed by Shimon Ullman and others. Makes sense, and there are some
interesting results. David was a friend, and we often discussed these topics. In fact, his famous three levels adapted a
model from generative grammar. But there was always the fundamental problem I mentioned. Vision is an input
system, crafting coherent images from lines, points of light, etc. Language is used for that purpose too, but it's not what
language is.
That fundamental difference, along with the fact that the principles involved seem quite different, has always been a
stumbling block to seeking any link.
From: Jeffrey E. [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, December 24, 2015 10:48 AM
To: Noam Chomsky
Subject: Re:
Vision rules needed to craft coherent image . Edges? " Faggehtabowtit." Two edges crafted by software
On Thursday, December 24, 2015, Noam Chomsky <
wrote:
I presume that the software just guides the hardware. Don't see how that changes the considerations.
From: Jeffrey E. [mailto:[email protected] <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'[email protected]');>
Sent: Thursday, December 24, 2015 10:09 AM
To: Noam Chomsky
Subject: Re:
The hardware of vision is an input system , It's the software that I'm referring to .
On Thursday, December 24, 2015, Noam Chomsky
> wrote:
EFTA_R1_01591400
EFTA02477448
We don't teach children language either, contrary to many beliefs. The visual grammar just grows, and
as is known, can develop in various ways depending on early experience. Same with the language grammar, though the
period in which experience has a shaping effect is much longer.
However, there are fundamental differences between vision and language. Can send you a recent paper
about it if you like. Vision is an input system. Language isn't. It's an internal capacity, a system of knowledge, which is
used to process input and also to produce thoughts (sometimes externalized). Seems also to be modality independent.
And their properties look wholly different, so it's hard to see how one could piggy-back on the other.
Noam
From: jeffrey E. [mailto:[email protected]
Sent: Thursday, December 24, 2015 9:24 AM
»; [email protected]
Subject:
we dont teach children to see. they have a visual grammar built in . why wouldnt we expect some
mutation of that system to allow auditory grammar.
please note
The information contained in this communication is
confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may
constitute inside information, and is intended only for
the use of the addressee. It is the property of
JEE
Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this
communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited
and may be unlawful. If you have received this
communication in error, please notify us immediately by
return e-mail or by e-mail to [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> , and
destroy this communication and all copies thereof,
including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved
2
EFTA_R1_01591401
EFTA02477449
please note
The information contained in this communication is
confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may
constitute inside information, and is intended only for
the use of the addressee. It is the property of
JEE
Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this
communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited
and may be unlawful. If you have received this
communication in error, please notify us immediately by
return e-mail or by e-mail to [email protected] <javascript:_e(%78%7D,[email protected].);>
, and
destroy this communication and all copies thereof,
including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved
please note
The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute
inside information, and is intended only for the use of the addressee. It is the property of JEE Unauthorized use,
disclosure or copying of this communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have
received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by e-mail to
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> , and destroy this communication and all copies thereof,
including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved
3
EFTA_R1_01591402
EFTA02477450
Technical Artifacts (9)
View in Artifacts BrowserEmail addresses, URLs, phone numbers, and other technical indicators extracted from this document.
Email
[email protected]Email
[email protected]Email
[email protected]Email
[email protected]Email
[email protected]Phone
2477448Phone
2477449Phone
2477450Wire Ref
referringRelated Documents (6)
Forum Discussions
This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.
Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.