Nicole Rust on Nostr: Trying to wrap my head around it. I'm a brain researcher in a psychology department; ...
Trying to wrap my head around it.
I'm a brain researcher in a psychology department; arguably what they call a "cognitive neuroscientist with a computational bent." And I love me a good brain metaphor. But this (cognitive science) paragraph and I live on different planets, and I'm trying to wrap my head around why, exactly, that is. Curious to hear your thoughts.
In this kind of metaphorical thinking, psychic states (such as emotions) are local maxima in a multidimensional space, which is not constrained to inner-brain dimensions, but incorporates bodily and perceptual dimensions as well (see Barrett, Ochsner, & Gross, 2007). Local maxima are established through constraint satisfaction processes. That is, in any given situation, some dimensions are fixed at specific values, be they input-related dimensions (seeing a crocodile nearby) or the inner-psychic retrieval of specific thoughts (remembering a horrifying scene from a movie). The network system identifies the best com- promise solution given the constraints.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30654702/
I'm not here to belittle this in any way. But rather curious about all the embedded assumptions that go into my own way of thinking and how they compare with the ones that go into this paragraph. Setting aside the fact that the word "psychic" gives me chills:
*) I also like to think about dimensionality and how cognition is reflected in multi-D spaces (and I'm quite fluent in that).
*) I am, however, curious about a few things. What is an "inner brain dimension?" Something about emotion/affect, I think. And so this paragraph is describing something like how perception, emotion and interoception combine to create our experience.
*) It focuses on the idea that our experience right now (a psychic state) is created by a "constraint satisfaction process" to maximize something. I can appreciate that once the question is posed in this metaphorical way, then one can inquire: what is that process? But that's consciousness, I guess?
*) I'm once again stuck by the jargon that separates us. Again, I'm quite adjacent to this world but not in it. Why aren't we better talking to one another? My 1st year undergrads are really smart. Why aren't we all talking to them (to ensure we can talk to one another)?
I'm a brain researcher in a psychology department; arguably what they call a "cognitive neuroscientist with a computational bent." And I love me a good brain metaphor. But this (cognitive science) paragraph and I live on different planets, and I'm trying to wrap my head around why, exactly, that is. Curious to hear your thoughts.
In this kind of metaphorical thinking, psychic states (such as emotions) are local maxima in a multidimensional space, which is not constrained to inner-brain dimensions, but incorporates bodily and perceptual dimensions as well (see Barrett, Ochsner, & Gross, 2007). Local maxima are established through constraint satisfaction processes. That is, in any given situation, some dimensions are fixed at specific values, be they input-related dimensions (seeing a crocodile nearby) or the inner-psychic retrieval of specific thoughts (remembering a horrifying scene from a movie). The network system identifies the best com- promise solution given the constraints.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30654702/
I'm not here to belittle this in any way. But rather curious about all the embedded assumptions that go into my own way of thinking and how they compare with the ones that go into this paragraph. Setting aside the fact that the word "psychic" gives me chills:
*) I also like to think about dimensionality and how cognition is reflected in multi-D spaces (and I'm quite fluent in that).
*) I am, however, curious about a few things. What is an "inner brain dimension?" Something about emotion/affect, I think. And so this paragraph is describing something like how perception, emotion and interoception combine to create our experience.
*) It focuses on the idea that our experience right now (a psychic state) is created by a "constraint satisfaction process" to maximize something. I can appreciate that once the question is posed in this metaphorical way, then one can inquire: what is that process? But that's consciousness, I guess?
*) I'm once again stuck by the jargon that separates us. Again, I'm quite adjacent to this world but not in it. Why aren't we better talking to one another? My 1st year undergrads are really smart. Why aren't we all talking to them (to ensure we can talk to one another)?