Certainly believe cognition is physically realized & that the brain plays a central role. But I doubt brain activity explains everything about human behavior, because human behaviour is contextualized. That means, part of explanans must extend to outside skull into the world.
-
-
I mean for real, would you task a person (or even a team) with doing economics in a quantum mechanical framework?
-
True, but I meant even more in principle limits applying to any idealized computational agent.
- End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Indeed, I was thinking of impossible in terms of something akin to uncomputable.
-
Somebody might have even tried to do this mathematically. Haha.
-
Kolmogorov complexity theory perhaps most suited. Reminds me about a discussion I had some time ago with
@bradpwyble and others on ‘compression’ and whether it was necessary and/or sufficient fir explanation. Let me see if I can dig up that thread ... -
Here is an entry into that previous discussion: https://twitter.com/bradpwyble/status/969340304808693760?s=21 … Scroll up to see the OP.
-
Oh yes that one. I agree with Grace btw, that it's possible even though perhaps incomputable, and that's a useful distinction to maintain.
-
The distinction is useful, but question is if uncomputable ‘explanations’ are explanations in meanigful sense. Perhaps different word should be used for such relation: eg ‘reductive relation’, ‘implementability’ or ‘realizability’ (brainstorming here) instead of ‘explainable’.
-
I think this distinction inevitability boils down to strong dualism vs materialism.
-
You lost me. I proposed clearer terminology that respects the distiction, not dualistic ontology.
- 16 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.