It’s a nice example of how the prevailing views are empiricist, and therefore expect mental/brain events to primarily depend on external stimuli, at least at a low level. And, when that is not the case, it is presumed to be a sort of noisy error.
-
-
- End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
This also assumes that these neurons are somehow exclusively used for processing what we call visual stimuli
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
When you see the same thing twice in a row, neural network has already made adaptations in handling that particular data more effciently. It is only logical it is very different result the next time. If it weren't there would be no adaptation and optimization.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Aren't the Jungian Archetypes, Kantian Categories, Platonic Ideas, Schopenhaueren Prototypes all constant behind the raw sensory data of neuronal firing patterns
-
Those are all imaginary. We can't communicate well enough to confirm that they are constant.
- 12 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Perception is always subjective and changing. This is the subject/object epistemic split in action.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Kantianism
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
What Would Galen [Strawson] Say?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.