Awesome as always; here's what I got for your AI. It is gonna be pretty hard to understand without my whole model though.-
Every example (above) is double scope blending found by pattern matching of features of (agglomerated (floating concepts, brain distributed a-temporal a-spatial processing)) concept by history, effect, future interaction - then modelled as prediction (senses (confounds) + in order to optimally influence future states variable across pop). this is cross-scale-mode decryption across cortex of unrelated concepts (ie, not logical positivism; not what neuroscientists think). This is a-temporal and a-spatial processing because people place object tool does not interact with other in future, yet t+1 (any prediction), is open prediction, and is now, and you predict anyway (ouch). Therefore conceptual determinism.
Thank you. Now what a thought provoking idea you have, very intriguing - so from what I understand, you’re describing a framework where double-scope blending isn’t bound by conventional spatial or temporal logic? Instead, the brain processes concepts in a distributed, a-temporal, a-spatial way, where pattern matching and predictions aren’t confined to linear cause-effect logic but rather emerge from cross-scale decryption across the cortex - which makes sense. And if I understand correctly this resonates with the idea of ‘conceptual determinism,’ where even seemingly unrelated ideas converge to influence future states. Now that is deep and meaningful.. and clearly a path to develop further, not annoying at all
Awesome as always; here's what I got for your AI. It is gonna be pretty hard to understand without my whole model though.-
Every example (above) is double scope blending found by pattern matching of features of (agglomerated (floating concepts, brain distributed a-temporal a-spatial processing)) concept by history, effect, future interaction - then modelled as prediction (senses (confounds) + in order to optimally influence future states variable across pop). this is cross-scale-mode decryption across cortex of unrelated concepts (ie, not logical positivism; not what neuroscientists think). This is a-temporal and a-spatial processing because people place object tool does not interact with other in future, yet t+1 (any prediction), is open prediction, and is now, and you predict anyway (ouch). Therefore conceptual determinism.
If this is annoying let me know.
Thank you. Now what a thought provoking idea you have, very intriguing - so from what I understand, you’re describing a framework where double-scope blending isn’t bound by conventional spatial or temporal logic? Instead, the brain processes concepts in a distributed, a-temporal, a-spatial way, where pattern matching and predictions aren’t confined to linear cause-effect logic but rather emerge from cross-scale decryption across the cortex - which makes sense. And if I understand correctly this resonates with the idea of ‘conceptual determinism,’ where even seemingly unrelated ideas converge to influence future states. Now that is deep and meaningful.. and clearly a path to develop further, not annoying at all