Would you expand on that? Having done a small amount of learning adjacent to this work, I’d like to find out more.
I was introduced to Friston’s work through “The Hidden Spring” by Mark Solms [0]. It seems well grounded in theory that there exist certain materials that maintain a specific range of entropy (S). Within some of those materials (i.e. biological), there are meta materials that enhance entropy maintenance by forming communication/processing networks. These networks are bounded in certain ways, say within the behaviors exhibited by a single cell organism, to much more broadly between neurons of an animal that has them. People then get hung up on what is meant by Bayesian and “Markov blankets.” [1]
Stipulating thoughts arise from biological underpinnings rather than something supernatural doesn’t strike me as “mumbo jumbo.” Applying math based on a well defined (but may well be incorrect) physics theory to define the meta material from which thoughts arise seems to be a quantization that may lead to stronger links between biology and psychology. To the degree that consciousness is primarily a psychologically defined phenomena, this is work that could reduce much mumbo jumbo.
Would you expand on that? Having done a small amount of learning adjacent to this work, I’d like to find out more.
I was introduced to Friston’s work through “The Hidden Spring” by Mark Solms [0]. It seems well grounded in theory that there exist certain materials that maintain a specific range of entropy (S). Within some of those materials (i.e. biological), there are meta materials that enhance entropy maintenance by forming communication/processing networks. These networks are bounded in certain ways, say within the behaviors exhibited by a single cell organism, to much more broadly between neurons of an animal that has them. People then get hung up on what is meant by Bayesian and “Markov blankets.” [1]
Stipulating thoughts arise from biological underpinnings rather than something supernatural doesn’t strike me as “mumbo jumbo.” Applying math based on a well defined (but may well be incorrect) physics theory to define the meta material from which thoughts arise seems to be a quantization that may lead to stronger links between biology and psychology. To the degree that consciousness is primarily a psychologically defined phenomena, this is work that could reduce much mumbo jumbo.
0. https://www.amazon.com/Hidden-Spring-Journey-Source-Consciou...
1. https://slatestarcodex.com/2018/03/04/god-help-us-lets-try-t...