Re: [evol-psych] Re: News: Seven reasons why people hate reason
- Robert Karl Stonjek wrote:
>>that the behaviourally cohesive self should be thought of as
>>I think it is always wise to keep in mind the fact that such a
>>reference to the brain is actually a reference to a postulated
>>non-observable causal substrate presumed to give rise to our
>>perception of a brain residing in four coordinates of spacetime
>>via one route and the apperception of thoughts, feelings and
>>self-conscious egos residing in a single coordinate of
>>time via another route. Whether this postulated non-observable
>>causal substrate is itself a physical entity is hard to say,
>>since no one has ever actually observed one.
> Behaviour can be observed objectively, which is why I think
materially 'Virtual' but behaviourally real. One can subjectively
experience both a cohesive self that is uniform over time and a
fractured self including indecision and even physical opposition
to decisions, such as when one tries to implement self-discipline
Unless, of course, "existence" is a concept we IMPOSE on reality
rather than a nice little drawer into which various pieces of it
can be neatly placed, in which case it's all virtual, eh? :)
- Now we are on to something.
Martin Sewell wrote:
>From where does this belief arise? Is empiricism illegal? Is logical
> A subjective Bayesian (Ramsey, de Finetti) sets the prior according to
> his degree of belief.
> An empirical objective Bayesian (Reichenbach) uses 'non-informative' priors.Non-informative here meaning something like "maximizing uncertainty or
Why would one do that?
Is it as a guard against subjectivity or charges of subjectivity? But
then this reasoning again
may be Bayesian.
> A logical objective Bayesian (Carnap, Jaynes) believes that a particularWhat available information necessitates what prior itself is reasoning
> prior is logically necessitated by the information available.
(couched as logic or
mathematics) and is itself based on empirical knowledge. No?