Does evolution reward the perception of truth?

In this forum both posters and comments will be restricted to topic-specific discourse. Comments that are deemed to be too digressive or off-topic, may be deleted by a moderator.

Moderator: Soul_of_Shu

User avatar
Eugene I
Posts: 1484
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2021 9:49 pm

Re: Does evolution reward the perception of truth?

Post by Eugene I »

Jim Cross wrote: Thu Aug 19, 2021 11:26 am Of course not. We can get out a ruler and actually measure the lines and discover they are the same length. We can find some degree of "truth" because we can measure and find relationships.
I think using the term "truth" is just inappropriate here. With our senses we can still observe regularities that we can infer to be "functional correlates" with the processes at the deeper levels of reality. By applying math and cognition we can "decode" and approximate these functional dependencies using math models. But whatever models we develop, we can never claim that they provide us with absolute "truth" about reality. The degree of their "truthfulness" is only the degree of the accuracy of mathematical approximations of the patterns observable with our senses or instruments.
"Toto, I have a feeling we're not in Kanzas anymore" Dorothy
Jim Cross
Posts: 541
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2021 12:36 pm

Re: Does evolution reward the perception of truth?

Post by Jim Cross »

Eugene I wrote: Fri Aug 20, 2021 2:41 pm
Jim Cross wrote: Thu Aug 19, 2021 11:26 am Of course not. We can get out a ruler and actually measure the lines and discover they are the same length. We can find some degree of "truth" because we can measure and find relationships.
I think using the term "truth" is just inappropriate here. With our senses we can still observe regularities that we can infer to be "functional correlates" with the processes at the deeper levels of reality. By applying math and cognition we can "decode" and approximate these functional dependencies using math models. But whatever models we develop, we can never claim that they provide us with absolute "truth" about reality. The degree of their "truthfulness" is only the degree of the accuracy of mathematical approximations of the patterns observable with our senses or instruments.
Notice the quotes around my use of the word. However, this original post was about " Bernardo claim that evolution does not reward the perception of truth".

And I have never argued for "absolute" truth.

Your entire argument seems contra BK and Hoffman so, of course, I agree with it.
JérômeVilm
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2021 4:05 pm

Re: Does evolution reward the perception of truth?

Post by JérômeVilm »

"Of course not. We can get out a ruler and actually measure the lines and discover they are the same length. We can find some degree of "truth" because we can measure and find relationships."
Thank you for your answer. If I understood Bernardo (and Kant and Schopenhauer) correctly, measuring a length would just be comparing one spacio-temporal perception with another, which both have no relationship with the things in themselves. What I'm wondering though is: What advantage would a spacio-temporal perception give you for survival if reality is not in space-time? If space and time are only gauges and dials in of our dashboard, as Bernardo says, what advantage would it bring to see an atemporal unity distorted into space-time?
Jim Cross
Posts: 541
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2021 12:36 pm

Re: Does evolution reward the perception of truth?

Post by Jim Cross »

JérômeVilm wrote: Mon Aug 23, 2021 4:18 am "Of course not. We can get out a ruler and actually measure the lines and discover they are the same length. We can find some degree of "truth" because we can measure and find relationships."
Thank you for your answer. If I understood Bernardo (and Kant and Schopenhauer) correctly, measuring a length would just be comparing one spacio-temporal perception with another, which both have no relationship with the things in themselves. What I'm wondering though is: What advantage would a spacio-temporal perception give you for survival if reality is not in space-time? If space and time are only gauges and dials in of our dashboard, as Bernardo says, what advantage would it bring to see an atemporal unity distorted into space-time?
My answer would be that space and time are gauges in the dashboard but they still represent something real about the world. It isn't an either/or proposition.
User avatar
AshvinP
Posts: 3003
Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2021 5:00 am
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Does evolution reward the perception of truth?

Post by AshvinP »

JérômeVilm wrote: Mon Aug 23, 2021 4:18 am "Of course not. We can get out a ruler and actually measure the lines and discover they are the same length. We can find some degree of "truth" because we can measure and find relationships."
Thank you for your answer. If I understood Bernardo (and Kant and Schopenhauer) correctly, measuring a length would just be comparing one spacio-temporal perception with another, which both have no relationship with the things in themselves. What I'm wondering though is: What advantage would a spacio-temporal perception give you for survival if reality is not in space-time? If space and time are only gauges and dials in of our dashboard, as Bernardo says, what advantage would it bring to see an atemporal unity distorted into space-time?

Space-time as purely 'physical' dimensions are not real, but as qualitative dimensions they are certainly real and have much to tell us about the underlying noumenal Reality in itself. I recommend you check out Cleric's essay in the general discussion forum on the "Time-Consciousness Spectrum".
“It is your presumption that freedom is something which you already possess that ensures that you will remain in chains."
Jim Cross
Posts: 541
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2021 12:36 pm

Re: Does evolution reward the perception of truth?

Post by Jim Cross »

AshvinP wrote: Mon Aug 23, 2021 1:33 pm
JérômeVilm wrote: Mon Aug 23, 2021 4:18 am "Of course not. We can get out a ruler and actually measure the lines and discover they are the same length. We can find some degree of "truth" because we can measure and find relationships."
Thank you for your answer. If I understood Bernardo (and Kant and Schopenhauer) correctly, measuring a length would just be comparing one spacio-temporal perception with another, which both have no relationship with the things in themselves. What I'm wondering though is: What advantage would a spacio-temporal perception give you for survival if reality is not in space-time? If space and time are only gauges and dials in of our dashboard, as Bernardo says, what advantage would it bring to see an atemporal unity distorted into space-time?

Space-time as purely 'physical' dimensions are not real, but as qualitative dimensions they are certainly real and have much to tell us about the underlying noumenal Reality in itself. I recommend you check out Cleric's essay in the general discussion forum on the "Time-Consciousness Spectrum".
How are they qualitative when we can measure them with a yardstick and a clock?

Not real. Wait. Isn't this the exact thing that emerges from Hoffman's network of conscious agents? Are you saying that isn't real either?
User avatar
AshvinP
Posts: 3003
Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2021 5:00 am
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Does evolution reward the perception of truth?

Post by AshvinP »

Jim Cross wrote: Mon Aug 23, 2021 3:50 pm
AshvinP wrote: Mon Aug 23, 2021 1:33 pm
JérômeVilm wrote: Mon Aug 23, 2021 4:18 am "Of course not. We can get out a ruler and actually measure the lines and discover they are the same length. We can find some degree of "truth" because we can measure and find relationships."
Thank you for your answer. If I understood Bernardo (and Kant and Schopenhauer) correctly, measuring a length would just be comparing one spacio-temporal perception with another, which both have no relationship with the things in themselves. What I'm wondering though is: What advantage would a spacio-temporal perception give you for survival if reality is not in space-time? If space and time are only gauges and dials in of our dashboard, as Bernardo says, what advantage would it bring to see an atemporal unity distorted into space-time?

Space-time as purely 'physical' dimensions are not real, but as qualitative dimensions they are certainly real and have much to tell us about the underlying noumenal Reality in itself. I recommend you check out Cleric's essay in the general discussion forum on the "Time-Consciousness Spectrum".
How are they qualitative when we can measure them with a yardstick and a clock?

Not real. Wait. Isn't this the exact thing that emerges from Hoffman's network of conscious agents? Are you saying that isn't real either?

We know (or should know) they are qualitative because that is what we essentially perceive-experience - their qualitative meanings with respect to any given aim (going to work, catching the bus, etc.). General Relativity established a long time ago that observers can come up with infinitely different quantitative measurements based on their relation with other observers. What remains constant is always the intuited meaning with respect to aims.

re: Hoffman - we don't know if his proposed model of networked conscious agents will successfully give rise to the dynamics of GR and QM when "projected" into "physical" space-time. But, in the meantime, we don't actually need any abstract model to confirm the qualitative meaning of these dimensions, only our own phenomenal experience of them.
“It is your presumption that freedom is something which you already possess that ensures that you will remain in chains."
Jim Cross
Posts: 541
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2021 12:36 pm

Re: Does evolution reward the perception of truth?

Post by Jim Cross »

AshvinP wrote: Mon Aug 23, 2021 4:08 pm
Jim Cross wrote: Mon Aug 23, 2021 3:50 pm
AshvinP wrote: Mon Aug 23, 2021 1:33 pm


Space-time as purely 'physical' dimensions are not real, but as qualitative dimensions they are certainly real and have much to tell us about the underlying noumenal Reality in itself. I recommend you check out Cleric's essay in the general discussion forum on the "Time-Consciousness Spectrum".
How are they qualitative when we can measure them with a yardstick and a clock?

Not real. Wait. Isn't this the exact thing that emerges from Hoffman's network of conscious agents? Are you saying that isn't real either?

We know (or should know) they are qualitative because that is what we essentially perceive-experience - their qualitative meanings with respect to any given aim (going to work, catching the bus, etc.). General Relativity established a long time ago that observers can come up with infinitely different quantitative measurements based on their relation with other observers. What remains constant is always the intuited meaning with respect to aims.

re: Hoffman - we don't know if his proposed model of networked conscious agents will successfully give rise to the dynamics of GR and QM when "projected" into "physical" space-time. But, in the meantime, we don't actually need any abstract model to confirm the qualitative meaning of these dimensions, only our own phenomenal experience of them.
If space-time isn't quantitative then nothing is, so the distinction between qualitative and quantitative is meaningless. Saying it is relative as in relativity doesn't mean it can't be measured. It means different observers can arrive at different measurements. But the measurements within margins of error can still be precise and used to predict things - like where Mars will be when we want to land a rover on it.

Hoffman, I think, claims it does or it will eventually will successfully give rise to the dynamics of GR and QM . So that would make space-time real in his universe too; otherwise, why would he bother with his theory at all. Keep in mind that what he claims is that he can insert his network of conscious agents into the PDA loop and substitute for W. It's exactly this network that creates space-time. All of this is modeled mathematically which would additionally mean a quantitative not qualitative reality.

Image


All I am saying is that space-time can be gauges on the dashboard and also out in the world real.
User avatar
AshvinP
Posts: 3003
Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2021 5:00 am
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Does evolution reward the perception of truth?

Post by AshvinP »

Jim Cross wrote: Mon Aug 23, 2021 4:30 pm
AshvinP wrote: Mon Aug 23, 2021 4:08 pm
Jim Cross wrote: Mon Aug 23, 2021 3:50 pm

How are they qualitative when we can measure them with a yardstick and a clock?

Not real. Wait. Isn't this the exact thing that emerges from Hoffman's network of conscious agents? Are you saying that isn't real either?

We know (or should know) they are qualitative because that is what we essentially perceive-experience - their qualitative meanings with respect to any given aim (going to work, catching the bus, etc.). General Relativity established a long time ago that observers can come up with infinitely different quantitative measurements based on their relation with other observers. What remains constant is always the intuited meaning with respect to aims.

re: Hoffman - we don't know if his proposed model of networked conscious agents will successfully give rise to the dynamics of GR and QM when "projected" into "physical" space-time. But, in the meantime, we don't actually need any abstract model to confirm the qualitative meaning of these dimensions, only our own phenomenal experience of them.
If space-time isn't quantitative then nothing is, so the distinction between qualitative and quantitative is meaningless. Saying it is relative as in relativity doesn't mean it can't be measured. It means different observers can arrive at different measurements. But the measurements within margins of error can still be precise and used to predict things - like where Mars will be when we want to land a rover on it.

Hoffman, I think, claims it does or it will eventually will successfully give rise to the dynamics of GR and QM . So that would make space-time real in his universe too; otherwise, why would he bother with his theory at all. Keep in mind that what he claims is that he can insert his network of conscious agents into the PDA loop and substitute for W. It's exactly this network that creates space-time. All of this is modeled mathematically which would additionally mean a quantitative not qualitative reality.

Image


All I am saying is that space-time can be gauges on the dashboard and also out in the world real.

Jim, if you are going to presuppose materialism, then of course none of what I am saying will make sense. If we abandon metaphysical presuppositions, then we can proceed to investigate phenomenon, including our experience of space-time itself, and figure out what is objective about it. The measurements are only objective to the extent that our own meaningful and shared Thinking activity is projected into them - that is what measurements are, in their essence, abstract reflections of that activity.

Under Kantian or Schopenhauer sort of idealism, I acknowledge this will end up incoherent - because it will seem like each "personal" consciousness can project their own thinking into measurement concepts and no one would ever agree. But I do not hold to that idealism - rather I hold we exist in a realm of shared ideation-ideas; thinking-thoughts. None of that ideational activity is "personal" to any localized conscious perspective. So it is no great mystery why our abstractions of Thinking activity can all converge on objectively verifiable measurements.

No matter what abstract measurement tool we choose to use, though, the underlying qualitative meaning of these spatiotemporal always goes beyond what the measurements can capture - in fact, the measurements do not capture that meaning at all, because that is not their purpose. The measurement tools are designed for the purpose of technological applications, not to investigate the essence of space-time or anything 'within' space-time. We have simply come to blindly believe that our own abstractions are essential without any philosophical or scientific warrant.
“It is your presumption that freedom is something which you already possess that ensures that you will remain in chains."
Jim Cross
Posts: 541
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2021 12:36 pm

Re: Does evolution reward the perception of truth?

Post by Jim Cross »

Ashvin,

Where did I presuppose materialism? I am arguing space-time is real because we can measure and predict things using it. I didn't say anything about what it or its contents are made of. It could be made of your shared ideation-ideas. It could be made of green cheese.
Post Reply