Bayesian rationalists think prediction is what thinking is. Critical rationalists deny many kinds of prediction are even possible, highlighting the growth of knowledge is unpredictable, and that most interesting things rest on this ever-evolving knowledge.https://twitter.com/coponder/status/1239808796647555072 …
-
-
Replying to @reasonisfun @bnielson01
Tbh, I'm having some trouble parsing your statements to arrive at what your stance is. Are you critical of Bayesian rationalists here? Can you give an example of denying a kind of prediction as being possible? I mean this all friendly-like. :)
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
My understanding comes from predictive processing + friston free energy. My sense of the brain is it creates expectations of the world based on prev input, then compares that to new input. If the expectation and the input differ, you experience surprise (ie a prediction error).
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
I know some Bayesian rationalists had a tendency to use S2 to crunch probabilities and make predictions verbally, but when I say rationalists want to get good at making predictions, I mean more than that. I'm curious to hear more about what you meant!
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @coponder @reasonisfun
Read
@DavidDeutschOxf"s Fabric of Reality (or Beginning of Infinity should work) and he explains using Karl Poppers epistemology that science is not fundamentally about prediction and some things are not predictable.3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @bnielson01 @coponder and
I doubt most things are tractably predictable. Jeff Hawkins is on the wrong track when he guess the brain's main function is prediction.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
I'd love to hear more on what you think the brain's main function is! The thing is, what you (and Lulie and Deutsch) are saying is not incompatible with the brain being built on tiny prediction events - those prediction events don't have to be about *reality* though.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
I doubt the brain truly has a main function. I suspect the mind, the software running in the brain that we identify with, does. I believe it is a conjecturing engineer in how to solve problems.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @bnielson01 @coponder and
What I mean is that the brain -- the hardware -- probably runs many functions not directly related to our rationality. Tiny predictions, like Hawkins thinks, is probably one of them. It's just not strongly related to our rational capacities. Separate interacting modules maybe.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @bnielson01 @coponder and
Our reflexes are part of our brain and nervous system and have a predictive capacity, but no one would mistake them for a rational actor.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
I'm struggling to understand what you think I'm saying because this response is, again, in line with my beliefs and the things I've put forward but you've said it as if it's a counterexample or something - what do *you* mean by rational?
-
-
It's a counter example of prediction necessarily being rational. It's a refutation of the idea that because the brain makes predictions (among other things) that it therefore follows that that rationality is primarily about prediction.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. 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.