Deep learning community is not against classical AI, they just don’t think it works as an approach to solving the problems that they’ve already made some progress, like computer vision, autonomous agents and even Natural Language Processing.

But to improve these deep learning models people are, for sure, looking at things like how the biological brain actually does it or the ideas from classical AI or even the innate tools explored by many philosophers. (My views strongly coincide with your views in this debate about innate machinery for AI)

I would know because I am doing the same and I don’t feel alone. For example, hear Yoshua Bengio talk about how we need to take some kind of inspiration in this conversation with Lex Freidman. https://youtu.be/azOmzumh0vQ?t=760(12:40)

Quoting Yoshua’s words(from 15:18), “… I think this is one of the weaknesses of current neural nets that we have to take lessons from classical AI in order to bring in another kind of compositionality which is common in language and in these rules …” (go on to listen further)

I can’t summarise Yoshua’s views or my views completely here but go on to know the perspective of the researchers not just what they are labelled of. This is not a popular culture, even though people could think that, still its ‘scholarly’ research what we are doing in deep learning(myself as a marvin-ian).