A brief appreciation of @NegarestaniReza's _Intelligence and Spirit_ from @urbanomicdotcom, and in particular, the final chapter on the philosophy of intelligence.https://amzn.to/3elGWI7
-
Show this thread
-
ifrit Retweeted ifrit
Great thread, this sold me -- bought a copy, look forward to reading it.
@NegarestaniReza, curious what your take is on FEP and related frameworks as models of agency & intelligence. You and I had a bit of a discussion about this a couple months back:https://twitter.com/metadiogenes/status/1232879904519262208?s=19 …ifrit added,
ifrit @metadiogenesThe 1st & 2nd laws of thermodynamics only hold for closed systems. Every system we actually care about is open & exposed to a heat sink: the sun. We can also talk about energy sources more generally, e.g. a battery can induce a thermodynamic potential. https://twitter.com/NegarestaniReza/status/1232834115889704960 …Show this thread1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @metadiogenes @SimonDeDeo and
Plenty of this is fine, if speculative, but the narrative that weaves it together rings false. Human society has always depended on forces outside of its control, but something as broad as "the paths we walk as a species" is overdetermined and not reducible to a single process.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @anti_minotaur @metadiogenes and
Human society in what sense of the human and society? Under material conditions, under historical self-consciousness, under formal definitions what the human or society mean?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @NegarestaniReza @metadiogenes and
Human society as a historical entity, and its historical course, so closest to formal definitions.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @anti_minotaur @metadiogenes and
Yes, that's Hegel-Marx gradient. But then how to reformulate this question, namely, that of history, according to new sciences given that Marx identified the recognition of history as a fully scientific enterprise?
2 replies 1 retweet 3 likes -
Replying to @NegarestaniReza @metadiogenes and
What Marx did with the introduction of the critique of ideology delimits the social sciences. The wissenschaft of history is ultimately a product of interests, (though this is not the same as relativism, because he also held that not also interests are equal).
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @anti_minotaur @metadiogenes and
Yes, but then we can't cut at the joints of the pathologies of history if we haven't understood the exact mechanisms that give rise to individual interests like rational choice theory.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @NegarestaniReza @metadiogenes and
Rational choice theory is the exact sort of thing I'm criticizing. It reduces the shimmering complexity of society into arithmetic. It really doesn't matter whether you're calling it rational choice, evolutionary processes, or the wisdom of the ancients; it's the same story.
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes
Then you should read Brandom's critique of it in Reason in Philosophy. One of the best.
-
-
Replying to @NegarestaniReza @anti_minotaur and
For a 'classic' empirical critique of rational choice theory I'd recommend «Rationality in Psychology and Economics» by Simon. Skyrms is (the) great(est) for readings on limited rationality models.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @jnegrogarcia @NegarestaniReza and
Today, RCT is something like the Invisible Hand, a credo that is only still alive in the interest of unscientific but widespread (socio)economic theories.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes - 6 more replies
New conversation -
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.