While I respect (some of Chomsky's work) it is amazing to me that he thinks language is something more than mathematics/statistics. Language is math, it is basically an advanced form of discreet mathematics. We can reproduce virtually anything on a computer, and it is no more "shallow" than artificial light from a lightbulb is "artificial." There is no magic going on, we are biological computers, walking number crunchers. Our brains just happen to operate with chemicals and analog signals, rather than transistors and digital signals. His view on this carries the drawbacks of academia, which has a tendency to over-complicate and over-formalize thinking.
it is amazing to me that he thinks language is something more than mathematics/statistics
He doesn't think that. Look at his linguistics work - google Chomsky Hierarchy. He very much does not think that it's magic.
All he's saying is that some kinds of statistical modeling - while stupidly useful and practical - don't give us a lot of explanatory power.
He's, metaphorically, complaining about folk who are happy using Boyle's Law because "it works", when he'd like more folk figuring out what atoms are all about.
Well aware of his work, but I realize I probably misread the article. :) I think I just expanded statistical modeling to encompass more fields than I meant to (you can, in fact, employ statistical methods to augment "deeper" systems like automatically developing rule systems for propositional logic).
I completely agree. The fact that math = language, and that it's built into our DNA, is astounding. And from there that the Halting Problem is basically tied into our DNA, that is, how we think, how our brains work, our ability to conceive ideas, is just mind-blowing. What Chomsky has done in his academic career in on par with the greatest scientists in our history.
