Untangling the Worldknot of Consciousness #3 with Gregg Henriques - The Cognitive Science Show

[@barbaralopez265]

2 Incredible men! Namaste!

[@Juhziz]

2:15 Recap of previous videos 12:00 Problems of Cartesian worldview. First Descartes' argument - connection between mind and matter. 15:15 Second Descartes' argument - comparative realness and intelligibility. 28:22 Hobbes. Cognition as computation. 31:45 Third Descartes' argument - reasoning and meaning. 38:17 Information as matter/energy vs information semantics. 41:20 Recap of three arguments. 46:40 Function problem. What consciousness do? 51:54 Intelligence vs Consciousness. 54:41 Representations and covariants. Relevance of representations. Emergence of mind from matter through aspectualisation. 1:00:15 Conclusion.

[@GrimGriz]

Thanks for picking up the front

[@Juhziz]

@@GrimGriz If I only got to comments section earlier...

[@raresmircea]

Bless your good heart Juhziz 🤘

[@ErnestoEduardoDobarganes]

The Cognitive Science Show... !!!

[@benjaminlquinlan8702]

I feel so blessed to have access to all these secrets. Like is there anyone else as on the cutting edge as the cognitive rat pack?

[@visitthebravenewnormaldotc5436]

Did you just coin the term 'cognitive rat pack' !? I've been looking for a term to distinguish these guys from the I.D.W. That's F+*K!NG Beauty-full!

[@benjaminlquinlan8702]

Yes I did .... TM TM

[@MattHabermehl]

Agreed. I very much enjoy the intellectual honesty, the breadth of knowledge and the refreshing insights.

[@BookWorm2369]

Great talk! Looking forward to the next episode !

[@kupkaon]

Interestingly, this approach of really digging into Descartes and really setting up the stage by spending time on defining the problem makes me understand the schism way better than the original AftMC, which is already great. Keep up the good work!

[@c_monster429]

What a gift...

[@GrimGriz]

2:15 Recap of previous videos 12:00 Problems of Cartesian worldview. First Descartes' argument - connection between mind and matter. 15:15 Second Descartes' argument - comparative realness and intelligibility. -------^ stamps sstole from Juhziz ^------------ 21:00 - ish, you talk about vacillating between the things... I totally just watched the September Q&A (or a different one, been binging) where you talk about the tension exemplified in the prodigal son. Here you seem to see it as a problem, and there a feature. Is it because we're missing the third thing to tension? 24:29 - trouble with trenches 25:55 - cognitive grammar and stabilizing realness 27:42 - Descartes' Hobbes-goblin 31:07 - Descartes^3 35:11 - presupposition misalignment 35:53 - Strong AI/Humanity's Children 37:39 - Bound up in the World Knot 38:12 - Model Semantics 40:01 - backdoor Aristotle 41:18 - argument recap 42:34 - Modern Western Sensemaking 44:33 - corpus callo sum 46:40 - what is consciousness for? 48:46 - Integrated Descartes Wrestling 51:05 - consciousness thermostat 54:18 - covariant reliability 55:55 - representative aspectuality 57:14 - aspectualization engine 58:37 - show me the hardware Note: captions call aspectualization spectralization allatime, and it's totally a Freudian typo 1:00:03 - zero-point aspectualization 1:01:27 - startle-fMRI's ftw 1:04:00 - teaser trailer

[@thevulgarhegelian4676]

Double Gregg Henriques on intragal stage and now with Vervaeke. Totally geeking out bonus

[@waynelewis425]

So a question for John on what precisely is meant by aspectual representation. By this, do you mean a token of sorts which is kind of a fixed thing, or are you thinking more of a process that Robert Rosen might call a modeling relation. The latter is far more powerful because of the ( sorry about the math ) functorial connection. Such a model ( which runs at faster than ambient time) over some finite subset of aspects ( falibally because of its essential incompleteness ) is a mapping which preserves causal structure as well as material transformational structure. I struggle to communicate this without a diagram...see any recreation of Rosen’s iconic diagram of the modeling relation.

[@raresmircea]

Thank you for this episode! Please consider making a series of shorter vids in which you describe things such "integrated information theory", "spontaneous brain", "predictive coding", "ontic structuralism", "object oriented ontology", "symmetry theory of valence", "brainwaves and their relevance", "adaptive resonance theory", "global neuronal workspace", etc.

[@johanbrandstedt9570]

TYVM great talk

[@namero999]

I would love a conversation between JV and Bernardo Kastrup. The dutch philosopher has a solution under analytical idealism of the generative problem (which btw I would probably consider an instance of begging the question), compatible with current science and does not require a god.

[@notmyrealpseudonym6702]

What were your thoughts after their conversation?

[@keevinsil]

john, can you talk with joscha bach, i think you guys would dig some deep ground

[@notmyrealpseudonym6702]

Is harmonizing aspects of covariation essentially temporarily approximating an invariant relationship between two or more aspects to create a 'figure/representstion' from the 'field/ combinatorial explosion'? Just checking I get what they mean at the 59-1:03:00 point?

[@sixtysecondphilosopher]

In my KZbin series Stripping it right back, I jump straight into the gut of phenomenology and begin to relay the mind through a’ prior structures and the axioms that support their place within. I am doing the king fu if you will as opposed to alluding to the work of the king fu masters. As much as I respect what was said, it didn’t say anything. Talking about past masters is not addressing the phenomenology of mind. It keeps going around in circles. Complex circles but circles nonetheless. Yap.

[@aminomar7890]

The irrational thief apes !