(a) This Paper uses the “lego” system of postmodern pseudoscience by accumulating cites while proposing no operational dependencies just loose analogies. (b) it’s true we don’t know if frequency ‘matters’. (c), slow speed of human memory feedback(recursion) in hierarchies …
… explains the persistence of experience. (d) economics(information, delay) rather than physics (energy, immediate) better explains brain function for the same reasons. (d) geometric (spatial) modeling in the hippocampal region explains consciousness. (e) the same for …
… competition for attention (economics). (f) action is calculated along with prediction, so explains why we detect choice before aware of it – explaining reaction times. (g) dorsal interrupt allows capture of state (control) for impulsive reactions. (h) cerebellum appears to…
… produce timing across actions (very complex), (i) We know the brain structures …that produce each of these phenomena. As far as I know, the mind including consciousness is solved, variation in geometry trivial, variations in experience minor, …
… weights (personality) limited, and the primary difference in experience due to predictions (imagination), given wide variation in experiences. So while task performance is marginally indifferent between individuals, predictive performance and emotional reaction to ….
… those predictions account for what we perceive as wide variation in experience. In other words, we vary greatly in prediction and evaluation, but not sense-perception. This is rather obvious in retrospect.However, it allows not only adaptation but division of cognitive labor.
.. and this division of cognitive labor is just as important to our evolutionary history as is language to transmit information between us.
… To understand the operational function of the brain it’s better to follow Jeff Hawkins, and Joscha Bach, etc. and the research they cite. Computational and economic(real) thought is a profound improvement over mathematics and physics(ideal) b/c accounts for causality and time.
… FYI: I was asked to comment on this paper b/c it’s an area of my work. And the author blocked me for this thread. But just as physics is supporting a vast population of pseudoscientists, so is almost every other area of the academy other than applied math, compsci, and biochem.
… If you can’t state it’s dependencies (realism, naturalism ) measure it (categories) or operationalize (transformations) you don’t understand it (narration).
… It’s this difference between verbal-idealism(words), mathematical-physical idealsism(existence), and computational-economic thought (action).
… At this point I’m convinced that understanding ‘the grammars’ is about as important as understanding basic physics.
RE: Author Complaint: I wasn’t responding to you, but to the audience that asked me to comment, given that I do work on the operational explanation of mind. You claimed you presented a ‘theory’ but didn’t. I explained why, as another illustration of what’s wrong with the academy and how to reform it.