I’m putting off reading (and watching / listening) as much as possible to focus on the writing, but I keep getting things I really do want to give attention to.
I did respond to this (Facebook) post about Brian Josephson, Nobel prize-winning physicist that’s been part of my metaphysical origins story since the start. The FB post. My response. [Will dig out text, but FB is very badly behaved.]
I didn’t yet respond to the content of this one about the rationality of optimism. The FB Post. My holding response – depends pragmatically on narrow vs broad definitions of both words. Hat tip Mark Hammonds.
Further to last week’s Blake post a piece from IAI linking Blake to Heisenberg.
Heisenberg meets William Blake: The danger of science’s “single vision” The need for poetic science.
And finally, I only interjected one small comment to Ben Taylor about this LinkedIn post on Karl Friston. The LinkedIn post. Hat tip to Daniel Friedman (mentioned in my previous post) for commenting / sharing. The post is a defence against a critique of Friston’s Free Energy Principle which matters to me a great deal:
Ben commented (quoting an effective summary) ‘high entropy states are most effectively achieved by the involvement of low entropy/negentropic agents’
I replied “That’s certainly been my take for a decade or two.” ie the creation / evolution of intelligent life – localised low or neg-entropy – is an efficient part of the universe’s drive to maximise overall entropy. The “reason why” intelligent life exists.
(The above is clearly closely related to the earlier FEP critique “The Emperor’s New Markov Blankets”.)
Confirmation bias is a good thing. It exists for good reason 🙂
=====