Banno

Well, you keep falling into it. It works - utilitarianism in action; you should be pleased. I'm not trying to present a comprehensive theory here - I ...

I say "yes", you claim that direct realism is the belief that the perception and the flower are the same thing, I point out that this is not so, that ...

I don't watch videos - much. It seems inevitable that the young people take this easy rout, but I'd much rather a paper; doubtless it's habit, but the...

It's a flower. You keep missing the point. The flower is not the perception-of-flower. It's the same error you have been making for years.

No surprises there. The Dark Room Problem was mentioned by Friston in the questions of a video you posted. The article in the OP came up on a search, ...

That's a fair assessment, and in line with Watkins' thinking. What I've seen of Friston's publications, including videos, shows a certain humility, or...

Are you confused as to the distinction between espousing and advocating? That is the only thing I can think of that makes your view at all coherent. E...

Yep. figurative. Not literal.

Just drop the temporal bias and this will work. It's properties that change. We talk of unnoticed changes. How could these be, if change relies on sen...

Yep. Kripke would say that Homo Floresiensis was not a hobbit, because the chain linking our use of "hobbit" to it's original use leads specifically t...

Indeed - showing where theology is mistake is one, quite common, way to hone your critical skills.

You'r weird.

How you could read that as not adopting and supporting sexism is beyond me.

I'm still here.

See how this assumes an external world?

Well, not quite. We want a theory that rules out things that are contradicted by the evidence. Yes! I quite agree. Small steps. Edit: Just to be sure,...

Not sure this is the right word. It seems to me that the very sophistication of the approach leads some to over-applying it. And I don't mean the auth...

That's the long-expected post. Your habit of attacking the messenger has been noted by others. Cheers.

I'm not sure that's it. The argument is apparently along the lines that avoiding non-anticipated stimuli explains not only individual behaviour but en...

Interesting. But that reinforces, rather than helps dispel, an instinctive distrust of theories that explain everything. You do understand that I am a...

Cheers. I'm more interested in just causing mischief, but will take a look.

presented a particularly neat summation of the Watkins' article. In particular: Hence the theory of evolution inspired wider research that was itself ...

So here's a bit more for the pot: The Dark Room Problem Again the point is made that an explanation for everything is an explanation for nothing. And ...

Not sure what you mean. The free energy principle plays it's part, one must suppose, but the question is as to the extent of that part, no?

Half the garlic crop plucked so far. Some rot - about a quarter lost, I think. Set out to dry. Should have enough to last until mid winter, baring any...

But it is not beyond the realms of possibility that curiosity itself drops out of the odd and obtuse considerations of thermodynamics - indeed, someho...

Did you mean arse? That the free energy principle is the constraint that drives adaptive learning is what is in contention. Sound advice. To start, le...

The dark room is a red herring. What about when surprise becomes confusion? Indeed, as I noted earlier, a theory that explains everything, explains no...

That's what I do. I sit in my armchair and reach reasonable conclusions. No surprises there. But surprisingly the sun is shining, so I'm off to look f...

I had in mind Descartes' "oven", in which he did his meditating. Perhaps an armchair in a comfy room with a laptop is the modern equivalent, the least...

Sure. You can play chess by yourself, but it is in essence a game for two players. Hobbits are for telling other folk stories.

Sure, caves are for things that crawl, dark rooms for philosophising. Both the big momma redback and I were surprised when I picked up the pot the oth...

Needs an edit.

So I understand that you think the dark room objection carries some considerable force against the surprise avoidance hypothesis because behaviour is ...

Sure, all that. What I said still stands: the notion described in the article is interesting, but not decided.

Where she chooses. Even though her connection with reality is diminished, she ought be involved in any decisions made about what happens to her. All y...

This bothers me. Not you, but others, will quickly decide that the concept "hobbit" is some sort of mental creature, and so exists in minds, and concl...

Did we do a thread on that article? Perhaps its time for another look. Clark is a co-author on the Free-energy minimization and the dark-room problem ...

No mice were harmed in the preparation of that article.

That's much clearer than you first posts, which left me with the impression that you simply weren't addressing the article. The difficulty with the su...

Yep. That's the argument.

:wink:

I don't follow that. It's use, not mention. As for use in order to mention... I've no idea what your point might be.

Quite fun, isn't it? But see Inexpressibility of Existence Conditions. It seems we can't conclude that Gollum exists.

Yes, you are right, and I agree. Lower free energy implies adaptive fitness. This was what brought on my confusion: And to get that, we also need that...

What was used, what mentioned? Porridge is porridge, but not "porridge", to be sure, but how would this be relevant?

The gullible? Perhaps you do have a point.

Indeed, idealism reduces to solipsism.

...and here "better" means less surprising? This is the part I've not been able to get a handle on: why is minimising surprise the very same as living...

I suppose, given enough rope, one might see the dark room problem as this very misunderstanding of "surprise"; that the technical term is being confus...