Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

On the dangers of seeing human minds as predictive machines

aeon.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 172 posts

Re: On the dangers of seeing human minds as predictive machines

#11

Post by thisiszilff »

cmehdy wrote: post #7
Veedrac wrote: post #5

If I've understood this article correctly, the thesis is that we should avoid trying to understand the mind, because understanding the mind is inevitably about controlling and subverting human behaviour to worse ends, and that it also legitimizes those ends by dehumanizing people. I am, mind, not totally sure I have understood the article, because the article is not written very clearly, as the point is never stated…

This reminds me of the typical criticisms that Daniel Dennett[0] has faced throughout the decades where he tried to argue the point that we can talk about consciousness through similar tools as those of computation (amongst other things) and that there isn't a reason to put humans on a magical pedestal of immunity from further understanding. There's some anchored belief that humans are somehow sacred beyond understan…

A particularly choice quote from Dijkstra here:

"The question of whether machines can think is about as relevant as the question of whether submarines can swim."

In this case I guess it's the other way around, but the sentiment still stands.

Re: On the dangers of seeing human minds as predictive machines

#12

Post by psyc »

abellerose wrote: post #6

René Descartes ruined the perception and healthcare of mental illness. Patients and even a few doctors would be more informed if they understood the symptoms of mental illness occur because of physical changes in the brain. Instead a misinformed belief of a chemical imbalance exists and is assumed as a truth by some physicians & nurses. Society is basically brainwashed into believing everyone has free will. The resul…

Mentally ill person here. I haven’t heard a mental health professional use the phrase ‘chemical imbalance’ or anything similar in 20 years. It’s my understanding it has been deprecated. It’s mostly repeated by laypeople in ignorance. It’s hard to flush something like that out of the popular lexicon, once established.

There’s a lot of maddeningly persistent misinformation about mental health on Internet forums.

Re: On the dangers of seeing human minds as predictive machines

#13

Post by rck »

Many words, few ideas. I was hoping for an argument based on ... well, anything. There's no real criticism of the scientific support for the idea that human minds are predictive. Just some vague connections to economics and a vocabulary that suggests anti-capitalist sympathies. Your attention is better spent elsewhere.

Re: On the dangers of seeing human minds as predictive machines

#14

Post by MaxBarraclough »

cmehdy wrote: post #7
Veedrac wrote: post #5

If I've understood this article correctly, the thesis is that we should avoid trying to understand the mind, because understanding the mind is inevitably about controlling and subverting human behaviour to worse ends, and that it also legitimizes those ends by dehumanizing people. I am, mind, not totally sure I have understood the article, because the article is not written very clearly, as the point is never stated…

This reminds me of the typical criticisms that Daniel Dennett[0] has faced throughout the decades where he tried to argue the point that we can talk about consciousness through similar tools as those of computation (amongst other things) and that there isn't a reason to put humans on a magical pedestal of immunity from further understanding. There's some anchored belief that humans are somehow sacred beyond understan…

> I recall Dennett pointing out how starting from Descartes the whole meme of the person within your brain doing things

I like Dennett's coinage for this error of reasoning: the Cartesian theater. If a theory of mind relies upon some inner mind, it hasn't explained the mind at all.

edit I see it has its own Wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cartesian_theater

Re: On the dangers of seeing human minds as predictive machines

#15

Post by mannykannot »

thisiszilff wrote: post #11
cmehdy wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This reminds me of the typical criticisms that Daniel Dennett[0] has faced throughout the decades where he tried to argue the point that we can talk about consciousness through similar tools as those of computation (amongst other things) and that there isn't a reason to put humans on a magical pedestal of immunity from further understanding. There's some anchored belief that humans are somehow sacred beyond understan…

A particularly choice quote from Dijkstra here: "The question of whether machines can think is about as relevant as the question of whether submarines can swim." In this case I guess it's the other way around, but the sentiment still stands.

Dijkstra, who valued rigor, was apparently greatly irritated by loose talk of computers as thinking machines and the use of teleological language in discussing them (in the sense of attributing purposes to programs, rather than their creators), so this quote could just be a reaction to that. If, on the other hand, it was offered in the spirit of "(artificial) machines could not possibly think, because thinking is something only (human) animals can do", that would just be a way of avoiding the question.

Re: On the dangers of seeing human minds as predictive machines

#16

Post by zoomablemind »

> "...Human beings aren’t pieces of technology, no matter how sophisticated. But by talking about ourselves as such, we acquiesce to the corporations and governments that decide to treat us this way. When the seers of predictive processing hail prediction as the brain’s defining achievement, they risk giving groundless credibility to the systems that automate that act – assigning the patina of intelligence to artificial predictors, no matter how crude or harmful or self-fulfilling their forecasts."

This seems to summarize the main thesis.

Modeling/simulating human effects by applying various technological approximations may be useful within the intended scope. However, expanding that scope and projecting the models onto the whole phenomenon of human brain is false, if not dangerous. The only purpose this sort of unwarranted projection serves is to justify the applied methods and the resulting treatment of humans.

And why all these attempts to 'crack' the brain? The author posits that the main goal is control.

But why one would need such a control? To subjugate, to make the world a better place, to live forever, or just make a quick buck and squirrel it away...? What do predictions tell about the ultimate intent?

Re: On the dangers of seeing human minds as predictive machines

#17

Post by abellerose »

psyc wrote: post #12
abellerose wrote: post #6

René Descartes ruined the perception and healthcare of mental illness. Patients and even a few doctors would be more informed if they understood the symptoms of mental illness occur because of physical changes in the brain. Instead a misinformed belief of a chemical imbalance exists and is assumed as a truth by some physicians & nurses. Society is basically brainwashed into believing everyone has free will. The resul…

Mentally ill person here. I haven’t heard a mental health professional use the phrase ‘chemical imbalance’ or anything similar in 20 years. It’s my understanding it has been deprecated. It’s mostly repeated by laypeople in ignorance. It’s hard to flush something like that out of the popular lexicon, once established. There’s a lot of maddeningly persistent misinformation about mental health on Internet forums.

Person with gender dysphoria here. I've still heard the phrase in Canada by nurses & staff. Also heard it several years ago when living in USA by doctors & staff. Unsure why you think I was referring to internet forums? I thought those were deprecated since 2009.

Re: On the dangers of seeing human minds as predictive machines

#18

Post by Gibbon1 »

psyc wrote: post #12
abellerose wrote: post #6

René Descartes ruined the perception and healthcare of mental illness. Patients and even a few doctors would be more informed if they understood the symptoms of mental illness occur because of physical changes in the brain. Instead a misinformed belief of a chemical imbalance exists and is assumed as a truth by some physicians & nurses. Society is basically brainwashed into believing everyone has free will. The resul…

Mentally ill person here. I haven’t heard a mental health professional use the phrase ‘chemical imbalance’ or anything similar in 20 years. It’s my understanding it has been deprecated. It’s mostly repeated by laypeople in ignorance. It’s hard to flush something like that out of the popular lexicon, once established. There’s a lot of maddeningly persistent misinformation about mental health on Internet forums.

The widespread and increasing use of psychotropic drugs says that 'chemical imbalance' still serves as the foundation.

Re: On the dangers of seeing human minds as predictive machines

#19

Post by psyc »

abellerose wrote: post #17
psyc wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mentally ill person here. I haven’t heard a mental health professional use the phrase ‘chemical imbalance’ or anything similar in 20 years. It’s my understanding it has been deprecated. It’s mostly repeated by laypeople in ignorance. It’s hard to flush something like that out of the popular lexicon, once established. There’s a lot of maddeningly persistent misinformation about mental health on Internet forums.

Person with gender dysphoria here. I've still heard the phrase in Canada by nurses & staff. Also heard it several years ago when living in USA by doctors & staff. Unsure why you think I was referring to internet forums? I thought those were deprecated since 2009.

https://www.google.com/search?q=chemical+imbalance+theory

Re: On the dangers of seeing human minds as predictive machines

#20

Post by dboreham »

psyc wrote: post #12
abellerose wrote: post #6

René Descartes ruined the perception and healthcare of mental illness. Patients and even a few doctors would be more informed if they understood the symptoms of mental illness occur because of physical changes in the brain. Instead a misinformed belief of a chemical imbalance exists and is assumed as a truth by some physicians & nurses. Society is basically brainwashed into believing everyone has free will. The resul…

Mentally ill person here. I haven’t heard a mental health professional use the phrase ‘chemical imbalance’ or anything similar in 20 years. It’s my understanding it has been deprecated. It’s mostly repeated by laypeople in ignorance. It’s hard to flush something like that out of the popular lexicon, once established. There’s a lot of maddeningly persistent misinformation about mental health on Internet forums.

I'm fairly sure I've seen tv drug ads in the past few years use the phrase "chemical imbalance".
Post reply on HN