And what they seem to have in common is that each of these is a visceral reaction to having a functioning, dynamic mental model (Temple Gradin wrote about her shock that most people couldn't 'run' dynamic models in their minds) that rejects some new claim because it doesn't fit.
-
-
yeah reading summaries here I think I strongly agree with the premise. basically this reductive scientific-materialist delusion we've been operating under for the bulk of a century - pretending that subjective state doesn't exist and if does then it doesn't matter - is so bad!
-
Strong agree. Abelson called it the “Tyranny of instrumentality” and i think ‘tyranny’ was a very good choice of words.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I have not! I'll check it out, thanks!
-
The first three (iirc) chapters tell a really good story about affective processing and how its necessary for threat detection and habit formation. (The later chapters are less useful imo.)
End of conversation
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.