| Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Modeling and NLP |
| Posted by: | Ken Watts |
| Date/Time: | 09/11/2003 18:02:02 |
|
I think my question is about the sense of the word "defines" in your response. I initially took your position to be that anything which did not proceed from modeling was not really NLP. But upon rereading WITW I realized that some of the most important and ground-breaking achievements of NLP to date (eye movements, reframing, alphabet game) were apparently not products of modeling. This led me to wonder if either: 1) Those achievements were products of modeling in some way I had not yet understood. (Your response denies this, if I understand it correctly.), or 2) There are other forms of discovery besides modeling which can also define at least significant portions of the NLP endeavor. I'm not at all sure that those are the only two possibilities, but I'd love to hear your thoughts on this. |