Fair enough. But notwithstanding, I contend that my claim is not vacuous. I would say that this particular failure of categorization actually reveals a deep truth, namely, that computation is universal.
> I would say that this particular failure of categorization actually reveals a deep truth, namely, that computation is universal.
I agree that computation is universal, but I don't see drawing a distinction between discovery and invention as denying that fact. In "computation is universal" language, the distinction is just the observation that there are different kinds of computations--moreover, there are different kinds of computations in the category "human mental processes". We don't need to say they're all the same to recognize that they're all computations at bottom.
