The deep problem in philosophy of mind is "naive realism" - the idea that what we see is a direct image of the world. Rovelli does not address this problem but seems to assume that our Experience is on a direct route that simply funnels data through the brain and back out into the world (ie: he is a naive realist).
The deep problem in philosophy of mind is "naive realism" - the idea that what we see is a direct image of the world. Rovelli does not address this problem but seems to assume that our Experience is on a direct route that simply funnels data through the brain and back out into the world (ie: he is a naive realist).
When you look at this screen there are two sets of things happening. The first is reflexes so that your pupils might constrict and you will have saccades to gather data from small areas. The second is that you integrate the saccadic data into a virtual reality. The virtual reality is at least 0.5 seconds late compared with the objective state of the image.
This means that our current Experience already contains decohered data. A wavefunction of electrons will decohere the moment a photon from it hits the eye, at least 0.5 secs before it is observed.
My view is that perception is a matter of algorithmic economising. Because that is how biological organisms deal with information. “How veridical are our perceptions?” I do not find a very interesting question. We share perception algorithms with other members of our species, hence the development of common aesthetics and certain persistent markers of physical attractiveness across cultures.
We are our perceptions, imaginings and thoughts. We are all our current experiences. Look around. Can you identify anything in your Experience that is not within the space and time of your current Experience? If you experience it then it is in your Experience. This is more than a matter of algorithms, we are a container with a geometry (arrangements of data with independent directions for arrangements).
The deep problem in philosophy of mind is "naive realism" - the idea that what we see is a direct image of the world. Rovelli does not address this problem but seems to assume that our Experience is on a direct route that simply funnels data through the brain and back out into the world (ie: he is a naive realist).
When you look at this screen there are two sets of things happening. The first is reflexes so that your pupils might constrict and you will have saccades to gather data from small areas. The second is that you integrate the saccadic data into a virtual reality. The virtual reality is at least 0.5 seconds late compared with the objective state of the image.
This means that our current Experience already contains decohered data. A wavefunction of electrons will decohere the moment a photon from it hits the eye, at least 0.5 secs before it is observed.
My view is that perception is a matter of algorithmic economising. Because that is how biological organisms deal with information. “How veridical are our perceptions?” I do not find a very interesting question. We share perception algorithms with other members of our species, hence the development of common aesthetics and certain persistent markers of physical attractiveness across cultures.
We are our perceptions, imaginings and thoughts. We are all our current experiences. Look around. Can you identify anything in your Experience that is not within the space and time of your current Experience? If you experience it then it is in your Experience. This is more than a matter of algorithms, we are a container with a geometry (arrangements of data with independent directions for arrangements).