= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
MaoShan comments on Neurological reality of human thought and decision making; implications for rationalism. - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (42)
If that is to happen, the bridge needs to be built from the higher-level intuitive downwards. Neuroscience is already building up from the bottom, so the unexplored and key parts are more likely in the upper-middle. If they were in the lower-middle, we'd probably feel closer to a solution by now.
Good point. Although I'm not sure exactly how you'd go about building downwards from intuitions. Has that ever been done before?
The main hitch to that type of progress is that there is too much infighting between which model is right in neuroscience, and which model is right in psychology, nobody has a sturdy enough raft to set sail into the unknown between them. How I would go about it would be to risk being wrong and start off from the most likely track in psychology, and invent the factors that, if followed through, would result in a currently accepted model of psychology. Like flavor for quarks. It would necessarily be mostly theoretical until the answers it gives become useful. Then, repeat as necessary.