-
439575.979385
In order to understand cognition, we often recruit analogies as building blocks of theories to aid us in this quest. One such attempt, originating in folklore and alchemy, is the homunculus: a miniature human who resides in the skull and performs cognition. Perhaps surprisingly, this appears indistinguishable from the implicit proposal of many neurocognitive theories, including that of the ‘cognitive map,’ which proposes a representational substrate for episodic memories and navigational capacities. In such ‘small cakes’ cases, neurocognitive representations are assumed to be meaningful and about the world, though it is wholly unclear who is reading them, how they are interpreted, and how they come to mean what they do. We analyze the ‘small cakes’ problem in neurocognitive theories (including, but not limited to, the cognitive map) and find that such an approach a) causes infinite regress in the explanatory chain, requiring a human-in-the-loop to resolve, and b) results in a computationally inert account of representation, providing neither a function nor a mechanism. We caution against a ‘small cakes’ theoretical practice across computational cognitive modelling, neuroscience, and artificial intelligence, wherein the scientist inserts their (or other humans’) cognition into models because otherwise the models neither perform as advertised, nor mean what they are purported to, without said ‘cake insertion.’ We argue that the solution is to tease apart explanandum and explanans for a given scientific investigation, with an eye towards avoiding van Rooij’s (formal) or Ryle’s (informal) infinite regresses.
-
439621.979536
Motivational trade-off behaviours, where an organism behaves as if flexibly weighing up an opportunity for reward against a risk of injury, are often regarded as evidence that the organism has valenced experiences like pain. This type of evidence has been influential in shifting opinion regarding crabs and insects. Critics note that (i) the precise links between trade-offs and consciousness are not fully known; (ii) simple trade-offs are evinced by the nematode worm Caenorhabditis elegans, mediated by a mechanism plausibly too simple to support conscious experience; (iii) pain can sometimes interfere with rather than support making trade-offs rationally. However, rather than undermining trade-off evidence in general, such cases show that the nature of the trade-off, and its underlying neural substrate, matter. We investigate precisely how.
-
494201.979591
There is a genre of moral philosophy for which I have particular affection, in which a thinker subjects an aspect of ordinary life to rigorous scrutiny, revealing it to be more puzzling or more profound that is typically acknowledged. …
-
612704.979619
The received view of scientific experimentation holds that science is characterized by experiment and experiment is characterized by active intervention on the system of interest. Although versions of this view are widely held, they have seldom been explicitly defended. The present essay reconstructs and defuses two arguments in defense of the received view: first, that intervention is necessary for uncovering causal structures, and second, that intervention conduces to better evidence. By examining a range of non-interventionist studies from across the sciences, I conclude that interventionist experiments are not, ceteris paribus, epistemically superior to non-interventionist studies and that the latter may thus be classified as experiment proper. My analysis explains why intervention remains valuable while at the same time elevating the status of some non-interventionist studies to that of experiment proper.
-
728068.979647
McQueen, K. J. [2024]: ‘Steven French’s A Phenomenological Approach to Quantum Mechanics’, BJPS Review of Books, 2024 In A Phenomenological Approach to Quantum Mechanics, Steven French o ers what he says will be his nal words on two key issues that he has for decades been trying to get across to the philosophy of physics community, one historical and one theoretical.
-
728086.97968
The theoretical physicist Michio Kaku ([2014]) once stated that the brain is ‘the most complicated object in the known universe’. For decades, neuroscientists have been trying to disentangle the brain’s complexity in order to understand how it can support our behaviours and mental life. In his latest book, Luiz Pessoa wants us instead to embrace the entanglement of this intricate organ, not as a way to give up on our quest to understand its workings, but as a change in strategy to better comprehend its complexity.
-
728211.979709
The book is structured into three parts. In the rst part (chapters 1–2), Chirimuuta gives a general philosophical framework with which to approach modelling perspectives in neuroscience. Part 2 (chapters 3–7) applies the framework to several detailed case studies from the history of neuroscience. Finally, part 3 (chapters 8–10) applies lessons from the rst parts to ongoing debates in both philosophy and neuroscience. In this review, I will begin by outlining the contributions in each of the three parts, with speci c focus on the strengths of the account. I will then give some criticisms of the meta-scienti c approach in the book. The goal here is not to criticize the book writ large, but instead to highlight potential debates within the generally productive stance that it lays out.
-
901175.979738
Quantum entanglement is widely regarded as a nonlocal phenomenon, but Deutsch and Hayden (2000) have recently received growing support for their claim that in the Heisenberg picture, entanglement can be characterised locally using objects they call descriptors. I argue that the notion of locality underlying this claim is a flawed version of the principle of separability that I call spatial separability. An improved version, spatiotemporal separability, reveals that their claim is false. The proposed analysis of separability also reveals the crucial feature of quantum theory that makes it “spooky” in any picture: quantum entanglement entails that there are non-qualitative properties, which are profoundly different from the qualitative properties we have come to expect from classical physics.
-
958866.979766
Mechanistic theories of explanation are widely held in the philosophy of science, especially in philosophy of biology, neuroscience and cognitive science. While such theories remain dominant in the field, there have been an increasing number of challenges raised against them over the past decade. These challenges claim that mechanistic explanations can lead to incoherence, triviality, or deviate too far from how scientists in the life sciences genuinely employ the term “mechanism”. In this paper, I argue that these disputes are fueled, in part, by the running together of distinct questions and concerns regarding mechanisms, representations of mechanisms, and mechanistic explanation. More care and attention to how these are distinct from one another, but also the various ways they might relate, can help to push these disputes in more positive directions.
-
1008057.979792
Time-travel fiction commonly depicts time travelers who encounter their past selves or, in the grandfather paradox, their ancestors. In traditional fictional representations of time travel, such as in H. G. Wells’s The Time Machine, travelers age in the same time sense as those visited in the past and future. Elsewhere, fantasy fiction supplies another possibility: the wizard Merlyn in T. H. White’s 1938 fantasy novel, The Sword in the Stone, meets a young Arthur. Merlyn ages in the opposite time sense to Arthur. Arthur’s first meeting with Merlyn is Merlyn’s last meeting with Arthur; and Arthur’s last meeting with him is Merlyn’s first. We can imagine time travelers who arrive in the past to meet their former selves, but now age in the opposite time sense. They are still time travelers since they are meeting their past selves. However, we have now added a twist from another part of the fantasy literature.
-
1593364.979818
We argue that special and general theories of relativity implicitly assume spacetime events correspond to quantum measurement outcomes. This leads to a change in how one should view the equivalence of spacetime and gravity. We describe a Bell test using time-like measurements that indicates a non classical causal structure that does not violate no-signaling. From this perspective, the violation of the Bell inequalities are already evidence for the non classical structure of flat spacetime as seen by an agent embedded in it. We argue that spacetime geometry can be learned by an embedded agent with internal actuators and sensors making internal measurements.
-
1822090.979843
Neil Mehta has written a fantastic book. A Pluralist Theory of Perception develops a novel theory of perception that illuminates the metaphysical structure, epistemic significance, and semantic role of perceptual consciousness. By and large, I found the core tenets of Mehta’s theory to be highly plausible and successfully defended. I could quibble with some parts (e.g., his claim that our conscious awareness of sensory qualities is non-representational). But I suspect our disagreements are largely verbal, and where they are non-verbal, they are minor. Instead of focusing on disagreements, in this commentary I wish to explore the metaphysical ramifications of Mehta’s theory with respect to the mind-body problem. Mehta has a great deal to say about the metaphysics of perception. Much of it seems to me to be in tension with physicalism. But throughout the book he remains officially neutral on the truth of physicalism, “in reflection of [his] genuine uncertainty” (ibid: 100). I will try to show that Mehta’s commitments lead almost inexorably to dualism (or, at least, away from physicalism) by giving three arguments against physicalism that centrally rely on premises to which Mehta is committed.
-
1939394.979882
In theory, replication experiments purport to independently validate claims from previous research or provide some diagnostic evidence about their truth value. In practice, this value of replication experiments is often taken for granted. Our research shows that in replication experiments, practice often does not live up to theory. Most replication experiments involve confounding factors and their results are not uniquely determined by the treatment of interest, hence are uninterpretable. These results can be driven by the true data generating mechanism, limitations of the original experimental design, discrepancies between the original and the replication experiment, distinct limitations of the replication experiment, or combinations of any of these factors. Here we introduce the notion of minimum viable experiment to replicate which defines experimental conditions that always yield interpretable replication results and is replication-ready. We believe that most reported experiments are not replication-ready and before striving to replicate a given result, we need theoretical precision in or systematic exploration of the experimental space to discover empirical regularities.
-
2112563.979911
In On Madness: Understanding the Psychotic Mind, published in 2022, Richard G.T. Gipps embarks on a philosophical exploration of psychosis. Generally speaking, Gipps’s book presents an approach he calls “apophatic psychopathology” (Gipps 2022, 2), borrowing from negative (that is, apophatic) theology and its method of understanding God’s nature by seeing how it defeats the predication of even those most supreme qualities we are drawn to predicate of Him. Gipps’s central insight regarding psychotic phenomena is that we best come to understand them not positively, by predicating of the psychotic subject this or that rationally intelligible, intentional state, but instead negatively, through seeing how such predications are here defeated. Sitting down with a person suffering from psychosis requires that we develop the capacity to stay with them in their brokenness, rather than projecting onto them an intentional structure that their illness has abrogated. Gipps comments critically on the relativistic tendencies we encounter these days, concluding that people suffering from severe psychosis are not happily thought of as just living in an “alternative reality” as good as the one populated by nonpsychotic people.
-
2227934.979939
Valde, K. [2024]: ‘Stavros Ioannidis and Stathis Psillos’s Mechanisms in Science’, BJPS Review of Books, 2024 In Mechanisms in Science: Method or Metaphysics? Ioannidis and Psillos o er a metaphysically minimal account of the concept of mechanism as it is used in science. They believe that what scientists mean when they talk about mechanisms can be adequately captured by what they call ‘causal mechanism’: ‘a mechanism is a causal pathway described in theoretical language’ (p. 3). Simply put, they argue that mechanism in science is a methodology, not an ontology. The larger aim of the book is to defend this claim on the grounds of both metaphysics and the practices of science.
-
2343345.979973
Primitivism about the direction of time is the thesis that the direction of time does not call for an explanation because it is a primitive posit in one’s ontology. In the literature, primitivism has in general come along with a substantival view of time according to which time is an independent substance. In this paper, we defend a new primitivist approach to the direction of time –relational primitivism. According to it, time is primitively directed because change is primitive. By relying on Leibnizian relationalism, we argue that a relational ontology of time must be able to distinguish between spatial relations and temporal relations to make sense of the distinction between variation and change. This distinction, however, requires the assumption of a primitive directionality of change, which ushers in the direction of time. Relational primitivism is an attractive view for those who want to avoid substantivalism about time but retain a primitive direction of time in a more parsimonious ontology.
-
2343364.979999
In this paper I argue that the concept of time-reversal invariance in physics suffers from metaphysical underdetermination, that is, that the concept may be understood differently depending on one’s metaphysics about time, laws, and a theory’s basic properties. This metaphysical under-determinacy also affects subsidiary debates in philosophy of physics that rely on the concept of time-reversal invariance, paradigmatically the problem of the arrow of time. I bring up three cases that, I believe, fairly illustrate my point. I conclude, on the one hand, that any formal representation of time reversal should be explicit about the metaphysical assumptions of the concept that it intends to represent; on the other, that philosophical arguments that rely on time reversal to argue against a direction of time require additional premises.
-
2458694.980023
The validity of a virtual human-based research methodology, in which simulated humans are used to generate knowledge about real humans, depends on substantiating multiple correspondence claims which are currently indefensible. One must substantiate that real and virtual humans are sufficiently similar with respect to their (1) control structures, (2) environments and embodied experiences, (3) adaptive histories and attunements, (4) social and cultural contexts, and (5) institutional contexts. If one’s confidence in any of these correspondences is undermined, then the foundation of this approach will crumble.
-
2458715.980053
What is active touch? A common conception of active touch gives a rough but rather intuitive sketch. That is, active touch can be understood as mainly object-oriented, controlled movement. While parts or the totality of this characterization is espoused by an important number of researchers on touch, I will argue that this conception faces important challenges when we pay close attention to each of its features. I hold that active touch should be considered as before all else purposive. This view has its roots in the active sensing literature in robotics but will be amended to give insight into human touch in the natural world.
-
2687193.980074
I consider applications of “AI extenders” to dementia care. AI extenders are AI-powered technologies that extend minds in ways interestingly different from old-school tech like notebooks, sketch pads, models, and microscopes. I focus on AI extenders as ambiance: so thoroughly embedded into things and spaces that they fade from view and become part of a subject’s taken-for-granted background. Using dementia care as a case study, I argue that ambient AI extenders are promising because they afford richer and more durable forms of multidimensional integration than do old-school extenders like Otto’s notebook. They can be tailored, in fine-grained ways along multiple timescales, to a user’s particular needs, values, and preferences—and crucially, they can do much of this self-optimizing on their own. I discuss why this is so, why it matters, and its potential impact on affect and agency. I conclude with some worries in need of further discussion.
-
2971813.9801
The making of mistakes by organisms and other living systems is a theoretically and empirically unifying feature of biological investigation. Mistake theory is a rigorous and experimentally productive way of understanding this widespread phenomenon. It does, however, run up against the long-standing ‘functions’ debate in philosophy of biology. Against the objection that mistakes are just a kind of malfunction, and that without a position on functions there can be no theory of mistakes, we reply that this is to misunderstand the theory. In this paper we set out the basic concepts of mistake theory and then argue that mistakes are a distinctive phenomenon in their own right, not just a kind of malfunction. Moreover, the functions debate is, to a large degree, independent of the concept of biological mistakes we outline. In particular, although the popular selected effects theory may retain its place within a more pluralistic conception of biological function, there is also need for a more forward-looking approach, where a robust concept of normativity can be an important driver of future experimental work.
-
3208566.980133
Integrated Information Theory (IIT) intends to provide a principled theoretical approach able to characterize consciousness both quantitatively and qualitatively. By starting off identifying the fundamental properties of experience itself, IIT develops a formal framework that relates those properties to the physical substratum of consciousness. One of the central features of ITT is the role that information plays in the theory. On the one hand, one of the self-evident truths about consciousness is that it is informative. On the other hand, mechanisms and systems of mechanics can contribute to consciousness only if they specify systems’ intrinsic information. In this paper, we will conceptually analyze the notion of information underlying ITT. Following previous work on the matter, we will particularly argue that information within ITT should be understood in the light of a causal-manipulabilist view of information (López and Lombardi 2018), conforming to which information is an entity that must be involved in causal links in order to be precisely defined. Those causal links are brought to light by means of interventionist procedures following Woodward’s and Pearl’s version of the manipulability theories of causation.
-
3208640.980158
The Bayesian brain theory considers the brain as a generative model of its environment (Friston, 2010; Knill & Pouget, 2004). The model infers hidden (inaccessible directly to the brain) states of the environment as likely causes of the sensory input and thus represents the causal structure of the world around it. The input comes to the brain from both the body through interoception and from the external world through exteroception. The generative model makes inferences – that also can be viewed as predictions - about the incoming sensations based on previously learned beliefs or priors. These predictions are then compared to the actual sensory input, and the difference between the two generates a prediction error (PE). The model learns by refining itself through minimization of PE, thus increasing its accuracy. This process is thought of as belief updating according to Bayes theorem, where a prior belief, encoded as a probability distribution, is adjusted into a posterior one based on the likelihood probability distribution:
-
3208661.980187
The most common theoretical approaches to defining mental disorder are naturalism, normativism, and hybridism. Naturalism and normativism are often portrayed as diametrically opposed, with naturalism grounded in objective science and normativism grounded in social convention and values. Hybridism is seen as a way of combining the two. However, all three approaches share a common feature in that they conceive of mental disorders as deviations from norms. Naturalism concerns biological norms; normativism concerns social norms; and hybridism, both biological and social norms. This raises the following two questions: (a) Are biological and social norms the only sorts of norms that are relevant to considerations of mental disorder? (b) Should addressing norm deviations continue to be a major focus of mental healthcare? This paper introduces several norms that are relevant to mental disorder beyond the biological and social. I argue that mental disorders often deviate from individual, well-being, and regulatory norms. I also consider approaches which question mental healthcare’s focus on addressing norm deviations in the first place, including the neurodiversity paradigm, social model of disability, and Mad discourse. Utilizing these critical approaches, I contend that whether mental health intervention is justified depends, in part, on the type of norm deviation being intervened upon.
-
3319986.980214
When you’re investigating reality as a scientist (and often as an ordinary person) you perform experiments. Epistemologists and philosophers of science have spent a lot of time thinking about how to evaluate what you should do with the results of the experiments—how they should affect your beliefs or credences—but relatively little on the important question of which experiments you should perform epistemologically speaking. …
-
3372181.980229
Questions about our knowledge of other minds have occupied far less philosophical attention than have questions about our knowledge of the material world. The major reason for this is the underlying assumption that the resources we should appeal to in explaining such knowledge are the same as those we appeal to in explaining our knowledge of the material world, namely observation and inference. Given this, accounting for our knowledge of other minds is not of much additional interest, epistemologically speaking. There can be debates about the kinds of inference required, and, indeed about whether perception on its own suffices for knowledge, but there is nothing fundamentally different here from debates and claims about our knowledge of the material world. Hence, it warrants only a page or two, or, at most, a chapter, in general treatises about our knowledge of the ‘external’ world. Call this the Nothing Special Claim.
-
3597451.980244
This paper introduces the Global Philosophy symposium on Giuseppe Primiero’s book On the Foundations of Computing (2020). The collection gathers commentaries and responses of the author with the aim of engaging with some open questions in the philosophy of computer science. Firstly, this paper introduces the central themes addressed in Primiero’s book; secondly, it highlights some of the main critiques from commentators in order to, finally, pinpoint some conceptual challenges indicating future directions for the philosophy of computer science.
-
3653329.980267
Good news for once! A faster Quantum Fourier Transform
In my last post, I tried to nudge the arc of history back onto the narrow path of reasoned dialogue, walking the mile-high tightrope between shrill, unsupported accusation and naïve moral blindness. …
-
3783943.980291
Could we transfer you from your biological substrate to an electronic hardware by simulating your brain on a computer? The answer to this question divides optimists and pessimists about mind uploading. Optimists believe that you can genuinely survive the transition; pessimists think that surviving mind uploading is impossible. An influential argument against uploading optimism is the multiplicity objection. In a nutshell, the objection is as follows: If uploading optimism were true, it should be possible to create not only one, but multiple digital versions of you. However, you cannot literally become many. Hence, you cannot survive even a single instance of uploading, and optimism about uploading is misguided. In this paper, I will first spell out the multiplicity objection in detail and then provide a two-pronged defence against the objection. First, uploading pessimists cannot establish that uploading optimism has the contentious implication. Second, it is in fact plausible to think that we could become multiple distinct persons. Optimists’ hope for a digital afterlife is therefore not thwarted by the prospect of multiplicity.
-
3783966.98033
There appears to be an epistemic gap between the personal and the impersonal. The apparent epistemic gap presents a challenge to reductionist views about personal identity according to which facts about personal identity are grounded in impersonal facts about physical and/or psychological continuity. I discuss and reject two strategies of trying to close the apparent epistemic gap, a phenomenalist and a Cartesian one. I then develop and motivate an alternative account of the epistemic gap based on the special perspecti-val character of inside imagination. The imagination-based account explains why there appears to be an epistemic gap between the personal and the impersonal and at the same time avoids a corresponding ontological gap.