@PessoaBrain I've never really dug into the Bickhard stuff. I have read a couple of papers, and always wanted more detail. But I'll give this a listen soon
Oh, I guess I should share this here. It needed about 200 more pages to work the way I wanted it to, but it’s a first pass at a lot of stuff I’ve been thinking about on the biology side of things with an awesome friend and collaborator, Jay Schulkin (free to download until 23 December)
https://www.cambridge.org/core/elements/biological-cognition/BB78D9F2B8434933AEED70DE7F63E4EE@HaneMaung absolutely. This gets clearer the more you see that narratively lean horror films can pull something interesting off by playing with your emotions, and doing things that yield lingering aesthetic effects!
@PessoaBrain More and more, I am starting to understand aesthetics as really interesting pathway into the complexities of human experience. Part of what I find interesting about metal and horror is that they both play with the richly affective aspects of cognition, in ways that reveal a lot of the entangled structures that you’re interested in. I need to read your whole book, because the parts of it I’ve read have been very close to the kind of orientation that I want to take up!
After a long discussion with a friend yesterday, I am wondering whether I am doing too much by trying to discuss metal aesthetics AND horror aesthetics in the book I am getting started on. It’s a hard call, horror seems to have a wider appeal, and seems more familiar. But music has a similar stickiness factor, and there’s a lot of metal that works to build atmosphere in ways that are worth taking seriously. It’s a difficult question that I need to think about carefully.
@PessoaBrain I need to move to another instance. I can never see what you’re responding to when you tag me
@PessoaBrain nothing here that I can see, much like the last thing you tagged me on ☹️
@PessoaBrain @DrYohanJohn @keithfrankish My money is on nope. All of the work arounds that I've seen would require such a heavyweight approach to capture syntactic regularities. It seems like people are just scared of symbols (I'm just a bit mystified by how they are implemented). So they build in many other whistles and bells and make their views biologically implausible.
@PessoaBrain @DrYohanJohn @keithfrankish absolutely on both of them. I don't think that either has a super plausible story about syntax. This is a place where battle lines are deeply drawn, and where it's hard to get conversations up and running. I have some thoughts about how the internalization of constraints can get us part way to a story - but I think that there's a lot of work left to do, and it will take a lot of real interdisciplinary work to make progress on the issues

Compositional Neural Architecture for Language
Abstract. Hierarchical structure and compositionality imbue human language with unparalleled expressive power and set it apart from other perception–action systems. However, neither formal nor neurobiological models account for how these defining computational properties might arise in a physiological system. I attempt to reconcile hierarchy and compositionality with principles from cell assembly computation in neuroscience; the result is an emerging theory of how the brain could convert distributed perceptual representations into hierarchical structures across multiple timescales while representing interpretable incremental stages of (de)compositional meaning. The model's architecture—a multidimensional coordinate system based on neurophysiological models of sensory processing—proposes that a manifold of neural trajectories encodes sensory, motor, and abstract linguistic states. Gain modulation, including inhibition, tunes the path in the manifold in accordance with behavior and is how latent structure is inferred. As a consequence, predictive information about upcoming sensory input during production and comprehension is available without a separate operation. The proposed processing mechanism is synthesized from current models of neural entrainment to speech, concepts from systems neuroscience and category theory, and a symbolic-connectionist computational model that uses time and rhythm to structure information. I build on evidence from cognitive neuroscience and computational modeling that suggests a formal and mechanistic alignment between structure building and neural oscillations, and moves toward unifying basic insights from linguistics and psycholinguistics with the currency of neural computation.
MIT Press