people are continuous processes. is that the same as being infinite-dimensional?
-
-
so your question "how many dimensions" is actually a really good one but I'm claiming that it's not the right first question to ask. the right first question to ask is "what is the phenomenon and how do we observe it and find agreement about those observations between frames?"
-
implicit in your choice of dualisms is that maybe there's less than 4 dimensions represented by these 4 dualisms. would you be satisfied to say it's actually 1 dimension? I'm trying to disrupt the language framing of this and suggest, ok, maybe there's 8 dimensions. why not?
-
I don't have a definitive answer. I think digging into the problem requires a heavy lift to cut away the language framing and not just being playing talking-monkey word games while circling the drain as our meaning flushes away.
-
I can see how that might come across as pessimistic w.r.t the knowability of truth about human cognition. I do think we can know things about that though but that we will not be able to justify our beliefs if we just shuffle the words around.
-
Tweet unavailable
-
the imaging studies are so primitive still :( and even if we had higher resolution we still don't have a good working model for neuronal activity and the contents of consciousness (let alone unconscious processes) my past life as a philosophy/cog-sci dual major still haunts me
-
Tweet unavailable
-
my second degree (the one I actually finished) is Computer Science, though by profession I'm just a webshit JSON pusher. the contrast between dry silicon computation and wet meat cognition is endlessly fascinating
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
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.