Editing Annotation:Text:The Control of Perception and the Construction of Reality: Epistemological Aspects of the Feedback-Control System/Yu95ydz2sk

Jump to: navigation, search

Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.

This page supports semantic in-text annotations (e.g. "[[Is specified as::World Heritage Site]]") to build structured and queryable content provided by Semantic MediaWiki. For a comprehensive description on how to use annotations or the #ask parser function, please have a look at the getting started, in-text annotation, or inline queries help pages.

Latest revision Your text
Line 2: Line 2:
 
{{TextAnnotation
 
{{TextAnnotation
 
|AnnotationOf=Text:The_Control_of_Perception_and_the_Construction_of_Reality:_Epistemological_Aspects_of_the_Feedback-Control_System
 
|AnnotationOf=Text:The_Control_of_Perception_and_the_Construction_of_Reality:_Epistemological_Aspects_of_the_Feedback-Control_System
|LastModificationDate=2020-06-11T20:06:27.757Z
+
|LastModificationDate=2020-06-11T20:05:52.122Z
 
|LastModificationUser=User:Sarah Oberbichler
 
|LastModificationUser=User:Sarah Oberbichler
|AnnotationMetadata=^"permissions":^"read":ӶӺ,"update":ӶӺ,"delete":ӶӺ,"admin":ӶӺ°,"user":^"id":6,"name":"Sarah Oberbichler"°,"id":"Yu95ydz2sk","ranges":Ӷ^"start":"/divӶ3Ӻ/divӶ4Ӻ/divӶ1Ӻ/pӶ30Ӻ","startOffset":0,"end":"/divӶ3Ӻ/divӶ4Ӻ/divӶ1Ӻ/pӶ31Ӻ","endOffset":870°Ӻ,"quote":"“Knowledge” is the construction and maintenance of invariances; and “learning” is an increase in the system’s ability to control sensory signals and to adjust reference signals to do that. Knowledge is not the recognition or awareness of these invariances and learning is not passive recording. This would encumber the model with some form of representational theory and would lead to an infinite regression, i.e. how do we know that we know, etc. This misconception arises from the view that signals, within a control system, usually imply “information” and perhaps knowledge. As D. C. Dennett argues:\n\nAny time a theory builder proposes to call any event, state, structure, etc., in any system (say the brain of an organism) a signal or message or command (or otherwise endows it with content) he takes out a loan of intelligence. He implicitly posits along with his signals, messages, or commands, something that can serve as a signal-reader, message- understander, or commander (else his “signals” will be for naught, will decay unreceived, uncomprehended). (1971, p. 96, italics in the original)Ӷ7Ӻ\nIf we try to apply this to Powers’ model, one thing immediately becomes clear: Though he says that the signal emitted by the first-order input function “is an analogue of an external quantity” (1973, p. 148), this analogical correspondence can be posited only by an observer – the control model has the signal and nothing but the signal. “What we experience is a set of outputs of perceptual functions, and we have no way to detect the true nature of the inputs” (Powers 1974 p. 6). That is to say, for the model itself, the sensory signal can have no “content” and cannot be decoded – it is what it is, a neural current travelling to a certain point in a network, where it arrives and functions as a neural current. As far as the system’s sensory signals are concerned, no “loan of intelligence” has to be taken out and in themselves they cannot constitute “knowledge.”","highlights":Ӷ^"jQuery321065832023118483012":^°°,^"jQuery321065832023118483012":^°°,^"jQuery321065832023118483012":^°°,^"jQuery321065832023118483012":^°°,^"jQuery321065832023118483012":^°°,^"jQuery321065832023118483012":^°°Ӻ,"text":"","category":"Argumentation2","data_creacio":1591898769502°
+
|AnnotationMetadata=^"permissions":^"read":ӶӺ,"update":ӶӺ,"delete":ӶӺ,"admin":ӶӺ°,"user":^"id":6,"name":"Sarah Oberbichler"°,"id":"Yu95ydz2sk","ranges":Ӷ^"start":"/divӶ3Ӻ/divӶ4Ӻ/divӶ1Ӻ/pӶ30Ӻ","startOffset":0,"end":"/divӶ3Ӻ/divӶ4Ӻ/divӶ1Ӻ/pӶ31Ӻ","endOffset":870°Ӻ,"quote":"“Knowledge” is the construction and maintenance of invariances; and “learning” is an increase in the system’s ability to control sensory signals and to adjust reference signals to do that. Knowledge is not the recognition or awareness of these invariances and learning is not passive recording. This would encumber the model with some form of representational theory and would lead to an infinite regression, i.e. how do we know that we know, etc. This misconception arises from the view that signals, within a control system, usually imply “information” and perhaps knowledge. As D. C. Dennett argues:\n\nAny time a theory builder proposes to call any event, state, structure, etc., in any system (say the brain of an organism) a signal or message or command (or otherwise endows it with content) he takes out a loan of intelligence. He implicitly posits along with his signals, messages, or commands, something that can serve as a signal-reader, message- understander, or commander (else his “signals” will be for naught, will decay unreceived, uncomprehended). (1971, p. 96, italics in the original)Ӷ7Ӻ\nIf we try to apply this to Powers’ model, one thing immediately becomes clear: Though he says that the signal emitted by the first-order input function “is an analogue of an external quantity” (1973, p. 148), this analogical correspondence can be posited only by an observer – the control model has the signal and nothing but the signal. “What we experience is a set of outputs of perceptual functions, and we have no way to detect the true nature of the inputs” (Powers 1974 p. 6). That is to say, for the model itself, the sensory signal can have no “content” and cannot be decoded – it is what it is, a neural current travelling to a certain point in a network, where it arrives and functions as a neural current. As far as the system’s sensory signals are concerned, no “loan of intelligence” has to be taken out and in themselves they cannot constitute “knowledge.”","highlights":Ӷ^"jQuery321065832023118483012":^°°,^"jQuery321065832023118483012":^°°,^"jQuery321065832023118483012":^°°,^"jQuery321065832023118483012":^°°,^"jQuery321065832023118483012":^°°,^"jQuery321065832023118483012":^°°Ӻ,"text":"","order":"mw-content-text","category":"Argumentation2","data_creacio":1591898769502°
 
}}
 
}}
 
{{Thema
 
{{Thema
Line 11: Line 11:
 
{{Thema
 
{{Thema
 
|field_text_autocomplete=Erfahrung
 
|field_text_autocomplete=Erfahrung
}}
 
{{Thema
 
|field_text_autocomplete=Lernen
 
 
}}
 
}}

Please note that all contributions to DigiVis are considered to be released under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike (see DigiVis:Copyrights for details). If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource. Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!

Cancel Editing help (opens in new window)