naive realism

[JPL Verhey]

Following the discussion about seeing, "who sees what", WIG and WOG,
representations vs behavior, I think Alex Green made a big leap forward
with his approach. The core of his approach is his departure from what
he calls "naive realism".

It may be surprising that it still exists - well educated scientists
that do not appear to take into account that whatever they observe "out
there in the world" is in the first place a production or show occuring
in their own skulls, ie being brain activity.

"The most widely held theory of consciousness is Naive Realism. Naive
Realists do not distinguish between their experience and the physical
world and believe that their perception is identical to the physical
objects that they sense. Most people are Naive Realists until they learn
about the role of the sense organs. There are sophisticated forms of
naive realism called Direct Realism - see Steve Lehar's(2003) review.
Many scientific theories of the brain are forms of Naive or Direct
Realism because they do not tackle the problem of how things are
perceived as if they are 'out there' in the world."

http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~lka/conr.htm

[Sir Frederick]

On Sat, 5 Mar 2005 13:34:28 +0100, "JPL Verhey" <matterD...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

Evolution got by with naive realism until now.
It is fast losing its effective function. Hopefully
our replacement species will not be so limited.
--
Best,
Frederick Martin McNeill
Poway, California, United States of America
mmcn...@fuzzysys.com
http://www.fuzzysys.com
http://members.cox.net/fmmcneill/
*************************
Phrase of the week :
For every complex problem there is a
solution that is simple, neat and wrong.
-H. L. Mencken
:-))))Snort!)
*************************