1 Burst results for "Michaela Musseimi"

Brain Inspired

07:11 min | 1 year ago

"michaela musseimi" Discussed on Brain Inspired

"Hey everyone. This is paul on today's episode. I have a two philosophers who have a background also neuroscience mark sporadic and mas- rita churrumata must read has been on the show before they're both doing Philosophy at the university of edinburgh edinburgh feel free to judge my pronunciation. But i think that they're both acceptable and our conversation. Today largely focuses. Around the topic of the computational approach to the mind so in some ways it's a continuation of last week's episode with david barack and jon krakauer but today we're talking more about the question of alternative perspectives on approaching the mind. Are they're useful alternative perspectives. Outside of the computational approach we also discussed some of the history of philosophy of mind some of those ideas and how they relate to where we are now and our current approach to study of the mind. We talk about representations the possibility of naturalizing representations. And whether that's even a desirable pursuit and we start off talking about the relationship between philosophy and science and whether philosophy and science of the mind are separate things or should be separate or whether they would be better served more integrated so if these kinds of topics and this episode is interesting to you. I would highly recommend checking out the book. That mark spivak edited with mateo colombo and mark contributed to the book as well as did most rita. The book is the route. Lidge handbook of the computational. Mind from just a couple of years ago. Of course i linked to it in the show. Notes at brain inspired dot co slash podcast slash one hundred and fourteen one fourteen where you can also learn more about mark and mazda. Thank you patriot supporters. Thank you you make my world go round as did mark and must be during this conversation. Enjoy must rita. You've been here before Mark has not been here before. So here's the real pressing question. And maybe i don't. I can't really mute marks headphones. But who's the better philosopher mark or his wife michaela musseimi. Yeah i don't think philosophers can be on a scale of quantitive. Goodness each has qualitatively good in their way. Who whose fault was that that you married a philosopher i've been i've been very lucky there. Not many philosophers hunters choose embarrassment. Okay enjoyed reading kayla's work as well so It'd be it'd be fun to have around at some point two although she focuses more on sort of the physics side but she's also does a lot with perspective elizabeth and cognitive sciences as well so really interesting stuff Token to hus- influenced my thinking a lot. So my trajectories. Spain to start off kind of hard-bitten by computation. Thank you know. It's all just objectively there you know. They're real fox Petitions forms and so forth on and on talking to michaela to see the virtues of perspective approach on and the ways in which you might want to think about different models different mobile so used in different circumstances as kind of move me more towards perspective. Lessen the apart this demand that's interesting well. Hopefully we'll come back to pluralism and perspective listen to the end. But i want to start off with just philosophy in general and history. I guess because they're really intertwined and You both appeal to history a lot in your in your philosophy but mark a few years ago you wrote a piece talking about how philosophy can contribute to the sciences of the mind and you actually spell out four ways and i don't know if we need to step through all of those ways but you know what i'm wondering is how you how you think philosophy is contributing most right now to The philosophy of the sciences of the mind. Yeah well i hope you. The mind attempted to question. Sort of a presupposition in the question. Okay which is that. There's this thing philosophy contributing to this other thing which is the scientists of the mind. And so there's a. I don't really see that. There's a sharp line between what's going on in philosophy in the mind sciences. So what kind of a common. They helped picture of the relationship between philosophy and the sciences. There's this community of scientists working lobs and psychology departments neuroscience departments and then over at some other end of the university. There's this kind of a strange group of philosophers who are kind of free. Dang they're looking at what the scientists are doing. And what are they have to be strange. Well they are kind of building building theories about what time to sir doing. And i think about spots kind of a common way in which people can see off relationship between philosophy and the sciences. And i think it's really unhelpful. Model off an picturing that relationship. So it's a model that naturally prompts assault that philosophy is kind of a fundamentally different activities from the sciences. On it also prompts the thought that philosophies fraud blais unnecessary to the sign says so. This kind of worry was very beautifully expressed by richard. Feinman when he said in a in a really cutting remark ten lost have sciences by peaceful to scientists. Ornithology is two birds. Just wanted to put that out there. As an example of kind of an unhelpful or a kind of an incorrect model of the relationship between philosophy and the sciences. And if you start off from that model than you're going to struggle to save her philosophy can contribute to the sign says must read it. Let me just ask you run off the bed. I do you think that neuro-scientists and i'm just gonna put a. I'm going to keep the divide between science and philosophy just for this question. Do you think that a neuroscientist would agree with that perspective. Or would they see them as more separate say they agree with the feinman perspective. So no sorry with with marks suggestion that they shouldn't really. They're not separate because that's coming from a philosopher. Well i can't speak for all the neuroscientists out. But i think that there is a big division which comes from people offering alive and doing that kind of collaborative work which is relying on data and modeling and is quite a different culture in terms of conference networks from the philosophical one so just unum attempts like material social.