Look at the concrete ontological ‘three-fold hinge’ that carves reality at the joints and keeps popping up everywhere: Objects (static things), Functions (dynamical processes) and Representations (signals). Objects are on the lowest level, functions are on the next level up, and representations are the highest level. (Signaling is always the highest level)
Below, you can clearly see the logical analogy to the basic concrete three-fold ontological hinge:
Predicate logic features static descriptions of logical relationships – equivalent to ‘logical particles’ or objects. See:
The next level (which is a deeper level incorporating predicate logic as a special case) is the Bayesian level. Bayesian inference features correlations between entities that have predictive power, charting the externally visible dynamic evolution of things over time:
The third and deepest level however, is the level of categorization (equivalent to analogical inference). Categorization refers to the process of grouping things into categories, in order to form efficient representations of reality:
This basic ontological three-fold hinge, as I mentioned, crops up all over the place. It’s absolutely clear cut. Even folks with minimal reflective skills can’t miss it. It’s absolutely the very first thing a transhuman toddler would be aware of.
Are humans rational utility maximizers? If not, shouldn’t we disregard all traditional welfare economics? If so, how can better outcomes be both possible and unrealized (i.e. how can inefficiency be observed)?
For the last time:
Look at the concrete ontological ‘three-fold hinge’ that carves reality at the joints and keeps popping up everywhere: Objects (static things), Functions (dynamical processes) and Representations (signals). Objects are on the lowest level, functions are on the next level up, and representations are the highest level. (Signaling is always the highest level)
Below, you can clearly see the logical analogy to the basic concrete three-fold ontological hinge:
Predicate logic features static descriptions of logical relationships – equivalent to ‘logical particles’ or objects. See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...
The next level (which is a deeper level incorporating predicate logic as a special case) is the Bayesian level. Bayesian inference features correlations between entities that have predictive power, charting the externally visible dynamic evolution of things over time:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...
The third and deepest level however, is the level of categorization (equivalent to analogical inference). Categorization refers to the process of grouping things into categories, in order to form efficient representations of reality:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...
This basic ontological three-fold hinge, as I mentioned, crops up all over the place. It’s absolutely clear cut. Even folks with minimal reflective skills can’t miss it. It’s absolutely the very first thing a transhuman toddler would be aware of.
Are humans rational utility maximizers? If not, shouldn’t we disregard all traditional welfare economics? If so, how can better outcomes be both possible and unrealized (i.e. how can inefficiency be observed)?