if you removed all the cognitive bias from a hypothetical whatever normal example of a functioning human mind, could it be self-aware conscious, would it function at all?

transition said:

if you removed all the cognitive bias from a hypothetical whatever normal example of a functioning human mind, could it be self-aware conscious, would it function at all?

Whew, what a question.

I’ve heard of at least 50 different types of cognitive bias. Removing all of them would be a massive undertaking.

mollwollfumble said:

transition said:

if you removed all the cognitive bias from a hypothetical whatever normal example of a functioning human mind, could it be self-aware conscious, would it function at all?

Whew, what a question.

I’ve heard of at least 50 different types of cognitive bias. Removing all of them would be a massive undertaking.

just toying with the idea the entire thing functions on biases, and awareness of perhaps, or not

I mean it’s biased toward survival for a start

transition said:

mollwollfumble said:

transition said:

if you removed all the cognitive bias from a hypothetical whatever normal example of a functioning human mind, could it be self-aware conscious, would it function at all?

Whew, what a question.

I’ve heard of at least 50 different types of cognitive bias. Removing all of them would be a massive undertaking.

just toying with the idea the entire thing functions on biases, and awareness of perhaps, or not

I mean it’s biased toward survival for a start

It’s certainly a viable hypothesis. Even a likelihood.

transition said:

if you removed all the cognitive bias from a hypothetical whatever normal example of a functioning human mind, could it be self-aware conscious, would it function at all?

no yes

transition said:

I mean it’s biased toward survival for a start

yes

So now to summarise https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases

Too tough to summarise.

transition said:

if you removed all the cognitive bias from a hypothetical whatever normal example of a functioning human mind, could it be self-aware conscious, would it function at all?

He-llo. This question appears in wikipedia, even on that wikipedia page, where it is expressed as follows:

“There are also controversies over some of these biases as to whether they count as useless or irrational, or whether they result in useful attitudes or behavior. For example, when getting to know others, people tend to ask leading questions which seem biased towards confirming their assumptions about the person. However, this kind of confirmation bias has also been argued to be an example of social skill; a way to establish a connection with the other person.”

Anchoring – relying too much on first impressions. Could a mind function (electrically) that automatically downrates the value of first impressions? Not well.

Attention bias – not paying full attention. Could a mind function if it paid attention equally to everything or would it quickly run out of memory?

Base rate fallacy – The tendency to ignore general information and focus on information only pertaining to the specific case, even when the general information is more important. (Coral bleaching would be a good example).

Berkson’s Paradox – The tendency to misinterpret statistical experiments involving conditional probabilities.

Clustering illusion – seeing phantom patterns in random data. Could a mind function without that? Perhaps not. Pattern recognition is a fundamental part of any mind.

Continued influence effect – The tendency to believe previously learned misinformation even after it has been corrected.

mollwollfumble said:

So now to summarise https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases

Too tough to summarise.

transition said:

if you removed all the cognitive bias from a hypothetical whatever normal example of a functioning human mind, could it be self-aware conscious, would it function at all?

He-llo. This question appears in wikipedia, even on that wikipedia page, where it is expressed as follows:

“There are also controversies over some of these biases as to whether they count as useless or irrational, or whether they result in useful attitudes or behavior. For example, when getting to know others, people tend to ask leading questions which seem biased towards confirming their assumptions about the person. However, this kind of confirmation bias has also been argued to be an example of social skill; a way to establish a connection with the other person.”

Anchoring – in meaningful anchoring, there is a 90% chance that the first result falls within the 90% confidence interval for results; in meaningless anchoring, WTF are we anchoring?

Attention bias – memory aside, how can a system that does not focus on important information and dismiss unimportant information, avoid focusing on unimportant information and losing important information?

Base rate fallacy – if information pertaining to a specific case, that indicates general information is more important, then is such information pertaining to the specific case less important than the general information? Wait…

Clustering illusion – without prior information that data are “completely random and patternless”, can a system that does not recognise patterns, identify data that are not “completely random and patternless”?

*: does not “random” also entail some kind of probability distribution

Continued influence effect – if previously acquired information has zero stability / persistence, what is memory and how does an agent adapt to its environment?

phyxt

SCIENCE said:

mollwollfumble said:

So now to summarise https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases

Too tough to summarise.

transition said:

if you removed all the cognitive bias from a hypothetical whatever normal example of a functioning human mind, could it be self-aware conscious, would it function at all?

He-llo. This question appears in wikipedia, even on that wikipedia page, where it is expressed as follows:

“There are also controversies over some of these biases as to whether they count as useless or irrational, or whether they result in useful attitudes or behavior. For example, when getting to know others, people tend to ask leading questions which seem biased towards confirming their assumptions about the person. However, this kind of confirmation bias has also been argued to be an example of social skill; a way to establish a connection with the other person.”

Anchoring – in meaningful anchoring, there is a 90% chance that the first result falls within the 90% confidence interval for results; in meaningless anchoring, WTF are we anchoring?

Attention bias – memory aside, how can a system that does not focus on important information and dismiss unimportant information, avoid focusing on unimportant information and losing important information?

Base rate fallacy – if information pertaining to a specific case, that indicates general information is more important, then is such information pertaining to the specific case less important than the general information? Wait…

Clustering illusion – without prior information that data are “completely random and patternless”, can a system that does not recognise patterns, identify data that are not “completely random and patternless”?

*: does not “random” also entail some kind of probability distribution

Continued influence effect – if previously acquired information has zero stability / persistence, what is memory and how does an agent adapt to its environment?

phyxt

Succinct.

we mean, they’re not really controversies / controversial

Witty Rejoinder said:

SCIENCE said:

mollwollfumble said:

So now to summarise https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases

Too tough to summarise.

He-llo. This question appears in wikipedia, even on that wikipedia page, where it is expressed as follows:

“There are also controversies over some of these biases as to whether they count as useless or irrational, or whether they result in useful attitudes or behavior. For example, when getting to know others, people tend to ask leading questions which seem biased towards confirming their assumptions about the person. However, this kind of confirmation bias has also been argued to be an example of social skill; a way to establish a connection with the other person.”

Anchoring – in meaningful anchoring, there is a 90% chance that the first result falls within the 90% confidence interval for results; in meaningless anchoring, WTF are we anchoring?

Attention bias – memory aside, how can a system that does not focus on important information and dismiss unimportant information, avoid focusing on unimportant information and losing important information?

Base rate fallacy – if information pertaining to a specific case, that indicates general information is more important, then is such information pertaining to the specific case less important than the general information? Wait…

Clustering illusion – without prior information that data are “completely random and patternless”, can a system that does not recognise patterns, identify data that are not “completely random and patternless”?

*: does not “random” also entail some kind of probability distribution

Continued influence effect – if previously acquired information has zero stability / persistence, what is memory and how does an agent adapt to its environment?

phyxt

Succinct.

Heh. Sorry i thought ‘phyxt’ was your only response after just quoting Moll in full.

sorry well here are our suggested non-controversies again, where we have this time also fixed the asterisks that unintentionally turned into bold formatting

Anchoring
– in meaningful anchoring, there is a 90% chance that the first result falls within the 90% confidence interval for results; in meaningless anchoring, WTF are we anchoring?

Attention bias
– memory aside, how can a system that does not focus on important information and dismiss unimportant information, avoid focusing on unimportant information and losing important information?

Base rate fallacy
– if information pertaining to a specific case, that indicates general information is more important, then is such information pertaining to the specific case less important than the general information? Wait…

Clustering illusion
– without prior information that data are “completely random and patternless”*, can a system that does not recognise patterns, identify data that are not “completely random and patternless”*?

*: does not “random” also entail some kind of probability distribution

Continued influence effect
– if previously acquired information has zero stability / persistence, what is memory and how does an agent adapt to its environment?

SCIENCE said:

sorry well here are our suggested non-controversies again, where we have this time also fixed the asterisks that unintentionally turned into bold formatting

Anchoring
– in meaningful anchoring, there is a 90% chance that the first result falls within the 90% confidence interval for results; in meaningless anchoring, WTF are we anchoring?

Attention bias
– memory aside, how can a system that does not focus on important information and dismiss unimportant information, avoid focusing on unimportant information and losing important information?

Base rate fallacy
– if information pertaining to a specific case, that indicates general information is more important, then is such information pertaining to the specific case less important than the general information? Wait…

Clustering illusion
– without prior information that data are “completely random and patternless”*, can a system that does not recognise patterns, identify data that are not “completely random and patternless”*?

*: does not “random” also entail some kind of probability distribution

Continued influence effect
– if previously acquired information has zero stability / persistence, what is memory and how does an agent adapt to its environment?

WTF did you get that? That’s not even near what I said in my direct quotes from that wikipedia address. And what you’re saying doesn’t make sense either.

> does not “random” also entail some kind of probability distribution

No. Not if you’re Bayesian.

mollwollfumble said:

SCIENCE said:

sorry well here are our suggested non-controversies again, where we have this time also fixed the asterisks that unintentionally turned into bold formatting

Anchoring
– in meaningful anchoring, there is a 90% chance that the first result falls within the 90% confidence interval for results; in meaningless anchoring, WTF are we anchoring?

Attention bias
– memory aside, how can a system that does not focus on important information and dismiss unimportant information, avoid focusing on unimportant information and losing important information?

Base rate fallacy
– if information pertaining to a specific case, that indicates general information is more important, then is such information pertaining to the specific case less important than the general information? Wait…

Clustering illusion
– without prior information that data are “completely random and patternless”*, can a system that does not recognise patterns, identify data that are not “completely random and patternless”*?

*: does not “random” also entail some kind of probability distribution

Continued influence effect
– if previously acquired information has zero stability / persistence, what is memory and how does an agent adapt to its environment?

WTF did you get that? That’s not even near what I said in my direct quotes from that wikipedia address. And what you’re saying doesn’t make sense either.

> does not “random” also entail some kind of probability distribution

No. Not if you’re Bayesian.

Also no fixed probability distribution if you’re recording anything from nature.

what if we record it a statistical number of times