All extremely interesting! Around the 1:37:00 mark in the video, I am wondering in terms of the macro system conversation related to motility of appendage movement, how might that relate to phenomena like phantom limb syndrome, where an individual can still hold the potential memory of the limb as a physical sensory and measurable response. Could that indicate other potentials whereby that individual could move the "phantom" limb "virtually", in their mind, in a way that the joint's of the appendage could not in the physical sense if the appendage was still physically there? Thanks for a great conversation!
The question, sometime around the 38th minute, of why we naturally identify blankets around cats and trees and planets is more than a matter of information parsimony. Yes, information parsimony is a consequence of blanket selections but not the cause. The cause is because we naturally intuit entities that operate individually as collectives. All the components of a cat that we perceive maintain a togetherness that tightly couples those cat components with each other while maintaining only sparse connections with its environment (everything else). In short, we as complex animate entities, are thing finders. We are thing finders because it is an evolutionary imperative that we be thing finders in order to successfully occupy our evolutionary niche. Thingness come from the physicality of life and existence. We make good selections of things due to evolutionary training. Information parsimony we get for free.
Find the mechanical-blankets and their dynamics; do the same for the psychological-blankets. If you'd like to see how the M-Blankets and the P-Blankets interact, that is an optional, often useful, additional exercise.
defining sections of liminal spaces through enactive social agreement and solipsistic bayesian world modeling. feel like FEP is essential for abstracted social dynamics.
All extremely interesting! Around the 1:37:00 mark in the video, I am wondering in terms of the macro system conversation related to motility of appendage movement, how might that relate to phenomena like phantom limb syndrome, where an individual can still hold the potential memory of the limb as a physical sensory and measurable response. Could that indicate other potentials whereby that individual could move the "phantom" limb "virtually", in their mind, in a way that the joint's of the appendage could not in the physical sense if the appendage was still physically there? Thanks for a great conversation!
The question, sometime around the 38th minute, of why we naturally identify blankets around cats and trees and planets is more than a matter of information parsimony. Yes, information parsimony is a consequence of blanket selections but not the cause. The cause is because we naturally intuit entities that operate individually as collectives. All the components of a cat that we perceive maintain a togetherness that tightly couples those cat components with each other while maintaining only sparse connections with its environment (everything else). In short, we as complex animate entities, are thing finders. We are thing finders because it is an evolutionary imperative that we be thing finders in order to successfully occupy our evolutionary niche. Thingness come from the physicality of life and existence. We make good selections of things due to evolutionary training. Information parsimony we get for free.
Find the mechanical-blankets and their dynamics; do the same for the psychological-blankets. If you'd like to see how the M-Blankets and the P-Blankets interact, that is an optional, often useful, additional exercise.
defining sections of liminal spaces through enactive social agreement and solipsistic bayesian world modeling. feel like FEP is essential for abstracted social dynamics.
Conversation Theory (Pask 1975) distinguishes Mechanical-Individuation (read 'blanketing') from Psychological-Individuation.
Mike Levin is presenting at a conference of the center for process studies in a few days.
let's ask him about panpsychism
Olefaction, as "blanket-free intrusion of sensoria."
What is information ????
The substrate of predictions...to gain information it to reduce uncertainty about a prediction of the state of a system
Such fun!
But see "in praise of reductionism " Barwich.
It's paraconsistence, all the way down