<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
 <rdf:RDF xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:cc="http://web.resource.org/cc/" xmlns:syn="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/">
  <channel rdf:about="http://pinboard.in">
    <title>Pinboard (mraginsky)</title>
    <link>https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/public/</link>
    <description>recent bookmarks from mraginsky</description>
    <items>
      <rdf:Seq>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.thephilosopher1923.org/post/artificial-bodies-and-the-promise-of-abstraction"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.05776"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3939493"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsta.2022.0041"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1389041709000163?casa_token=8dkZ1O1iNBcAAAAA:gnuocqU5jszqBuwnBv1BYYua466pUhmQXOokW-3DOCA_-v5GNHpSCvptgCXuxYcYizauW6_Qzt8"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0010027789900164"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USF1H70bRl0"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/095150899105927"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1016159621665"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://openreview.net/forum?id=BZ5a1r-kVsf"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22582739/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://aeon.co/amp/essays/how-to-understand-cells-tissues-and-organisms-as-agents-with-agendas"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.cogsci.uci.edu/~ddhoff/ompref.html"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.ucs.louisiana.edu/~isb9112/dept/phil341/histconn.html"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~db=all~content=a906361798"/>
      </rdf:Seq>
    </items>
  </channel><item rdf:about="https://www.thephilosopher1923.org/post/artificial-bodies-and-the-promise-of-abstraction">
    <title>&quot;Artificial Bodies and the Promise of Abstraction&quot;: a conversation with Peter Wolfendale (Keywords: Philosophy of Mind; Phenomenology; Embodiment)</title>
    <dc:date>2026-04-18T21:20:47+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://www.thephilosopher1923.org/post/artificial-bodies-and-the-promise-of-abstraction</link>
    <dc:creator>mraginsky</dc:creator><dc:subject>to-read philosophy cognitive-science embodiment ai</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/b:aa3cab335182/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:to-read"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:philosophy"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:cognitive-science"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:embodiment"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:ai"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.05776">
    <title>[2508.05776] Whither symbols in the era of advanced neural networks?</title>
    <dc:date>2025-08-29T14:15:06+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.05776</link>
    <dc:creator>mraginsky</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[Some of the strongest evidence that human minds should be thought about in terms of symbolic systems has been the way they combine ideas, produce novelty, and learn quickly. We argue that modern neural networks -- and the artificial intelligence systems built upon them -- exhibit similar abilities. This undermines the argument that the cognitive processes and representations used by human minds are symbolic, although the fact that these neural networks are typically trained on data generated by symbolic systems illustrates that such systems play an important role in characterizing the abstract problems that human minds have to solve. This argument leads us to offer a new agenda for research on the symbolic basis of human thought. ]]></description>
<dc:subject>papers to-read ai large-language-models cognitive-science</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/b:a55868592f48/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:papers"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:to-read"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:ai"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:large-language-models"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:cognitive-science"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3939493">
    <title>Reflexivity and the Market Mind Hypothesis: Why George Soros is Not a Failed Philosopher (and What it Means for Economics, the Economy, and Investing) by Patrick Schotanus, Ron Chrisley, Andy Clark, Duncan Pritchard, Aaron Schurger :: SSRN</title>
    <dc:date>2025-01-20T03:20:55+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3939493</link>
    <dc:creator>mraginsky</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[George Soros is one of the best traders of all time. That is the general consensus. While Soros gladly accepts that compliment he frequently also expressed his frustration that he failed as a philosopher. Specifically, he admits that he was unable to formulate his philosophy of reflexivity from its original abstractions. More importantly, reflexivity—which informed his successful trading—did not get the academic recognition that Soros’s track record suggests it deserves. This paper will discuss the reasons for this, the key one being that reflexivity points to the elephant in economics’s room. This will be highlighted by explaining reflexivity, from its original abstractions, in novel terms provided by cognitive science. In particular, via philosophy of mind this paper will argue why Soros is not a failed philosopher. This leads to the submission that reflexivity deserves proper recognition as an early contribution to the emerging field of cognitive economics, for which the Market Mind Hypothesis is a standard bearer. Moreover, the issues discussed are relevant in the wider context of our economic predicament. ]]></description>
<dc:subject>papers to-read epistemology philosophy-of-science economics uncertainty risk cognitive-science via:_onionesque</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/b:29d148179d4d/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:papers"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:to-read"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:epistemology"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:philosophy-of-science"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:economics"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:uncertainty"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:risk"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:cognitive-science"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:via:_onionesque"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsta.2022.0041">
    <title>Symbols and grounding in large language models | Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences</title>
    <dc:date>2023-07-28T16:59:42+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsta.2022.0041</link>
    <dc:creator>mraginsky</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[Large language models (LLMs) are one of the most impressive achievements of artificial intelligence in recent years. However, their relevance to the study of language more broadly remains unclear. This article considers the potential of LLMs to serve as models of language understanding in humans. While debate on this question typically centres around models’ performance on challenging language understanding tasks, this article argues that the answer depends on models’ underlying competence, and thus that the focus of the debate should be on empirical work which seeks to characterize the representations and processing algorithms that underlie model behaviour. From this perspective, the article offers counterarguments to two commonly cited reasons why LLMs cannot serve as plausible models of language in humans: their lack of symbolic structure and their lack of grounding. For each, a case is made that recent empirical trends undermine the common assumptions about LLMs, and thus that it is premature to draw conclusions about LLMs’ ability (or lack thereof) to offer insights on human language representation and understanding.

This article is part of a discussion meeting issue ‘Cognitive artificial intelligence’.]]></description>
<dc:subject>papers to-read ai language cognitive-science computation</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/b:e9117ab25de1/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:papers"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:to-read"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:ai"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:language"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:cognitive-science"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:computation"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1389041709000163?casa_token=8dkZ1O1iNBcAAAAA:gnuocqU5jszqBuwnBv1BYYua466pUhmQXOokW-3DOCA_-v5GNHpSCvptgCXuxYcYizauW6_Qzt8">
    <title>On strong anticipation - ScienceDirect</title>
    <dc:date>2023-05-04T16:41:49+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1389041709000163?casa_token=8dkZ1O1iNBcAAAAA:gnuocqU5jszqBuwnBv1BYYua466pUhmQXOokW-3DOCA_-v5GNHpSCvptgCXuxYcYizauW6_Qzt8</link>
    <dc:creator>mraginsky</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[We examine Dubois’s [Dubois, D., 2003. Mathematical foundations of discrete and functional systems with strong and weak anticipations. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 2684, 110–132.] distinction between weak anticipation and strong anticipation. Anticipation is weak if it arises from a model of the system via internal simulations. Anticipation is strong if it arises from the system itself via lawful regularities embedded in the system’s ordinary mode of functioning. The assumption of weak anticipation dominates cognitive science and neuroscience and in particular the study of perception and action. The assumption of strong anticipation, however, seems to be required by anticipation’s ubiquity. It is, for example, characteristic of homeostatic processes at the level of the organism, organs, and cells. We develop the formal distinction between strong and weak anticipation by elaboration of anticipating synchronization, a phenomenon arising from time delays in appropriately coupled dynamical systems. The elaboration is conducted in respect to (a) strictly physical systems, (b) the defining features of circadian rhythms, often viewed as paradigmatic of biological behavior based in internal models, (c) Pavlovian learning, and (d) forward models in motor control. We identify the common thread of strongly anticipatory systems and argue for its significance in furthering understanding of notions such as “internal”, “model” and “prediction”.]]></description>
<dc:subject>papers to-read control-theory dynamical-systems ecological-psychology cognitive-science</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/b:a614ef1065ba/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:papers"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:to-read"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:control-theory"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:dynamical-systems"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:ecological-psychology"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:cognitive-science"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0010027789900164">
    <title>Evolution, selection and cognition: From “learning” to parameter setting in biology and in the study of language - ScienceDirect</title>
    <dc:date>2022-08-21T14:17:19+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0010027789900164</link>
    <dc:creator>mraginsky</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[Most biologists and some cognitive scientists have independently reached the conclusion that there is no such thing as learning in the traditional “instructive” sense. This is, admittedly, a somewhat extreme thesis, but I defend it herein the light of data and theories jointly extracted from biology, especially from evolutionary theory and immunology, and from modern generative grammar. I also point out that the general demise of learning is uncontroversial in the biological sciences, while a similar consensus has not yet been reached in psychology and in linguistics at large. Since many arguments presently offered in defense of learning and in defense of “general intelligence” are often based on a distorted picture of human biological evolution, I devote some sections of this paper to a critique of “adaptationism,” providing also a sketch of a better evolutionary theory (one based on “exaptation”). Moreover, since certain standard arguments presented today as “knock-down” in psychology, in linguistics and in artificial intelligence are a perfect replica of those once voiced]]></description>
<dc:subject>papers to-read cognitive-science biology evolution ai</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/b:f6757a8b64a4/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:papers"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:to-read"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:cognitive-science"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:biology"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:ai"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USF1H70bRl0">
    <title>Brian Cantwell Smith The philosophy of computation meaning, mechanism, mystery - YouTube</title>
    <dc:date>2022-08-02T16:35:23+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USF1H70bRl0</link>
    <dc:creator>mraginsky</dc:creator><dc:subject>philosophy cognitive-science ai computation</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/b:9ffa8e1f0ccc/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:philosophy"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:cognitive-science"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:ai"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:computation"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/095150899105927">
    <title>Qualia, Space, and Control: Philosophical Psychology: Vol 12, No 1</title>
    <dc:date>2022-08-02T16:22:28+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/095150899105927</link>
    <dc:creator>mraginsky</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[According to representionalists, qualia-the introspectible properties of sensory experience-are exhausted by the representational contents of experience. Representationalists typically advocate an informational psychosemantics whereby a brain state represents one of its causal antecedents in evolutionarily determined optimal circumstances. I argue that such a psychosemantics may not apply to certain aspects of our experience, namely, our experience of space in vision, hearing, and touch. I offer that these cases can be handled by supplementing informational psychosemantics with a procedural psychosemantics whereby a representation is about its effects instead of its causes. I discuss conceptual and empirical points that favor a procedural representationalism for our experience of space.]]></description>
<dc:subject>papers to-read philosophy perception cognitive-science</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/b:c0fddd641a36/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:papers"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:to-read"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:philosophy"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:perception"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:cognitive-science"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1016159621665">
    <title>Selective Representing and World-Making | SpringerLink</title>
    <dc:date>2022-08-02T16:21:50+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1016159621665</link>
    <dc:creator>mraginsky</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[In this paper, we discuss the thesis of selective representing –- the idea that the contents of the mental representations had by organisms are highly constrained by the biological niches within which the organisms evolved. While such a thesis has been defended by several authors elsewhere, our primary concern here is to take up the issue of the compatibility of selective representing and realism. In this paper we hope to show three things. First, that the notion of selective representing is fully consistent with the realist idea of a mind-independent world. Second, that not only are these two consistent, but that the latter (the realist conception of a mind-independent world) provides the most powerful perspective from which to motivate and understand the differing perceptual and cognitive profiles themselves. And third, that the (genuine and important) sense in which organism and environment may together constitute an integrated system of scientific interest poses no additional threat to the realist conception.]]></description>
<dc:subject>papers have-read epistemology perception realism cognitive-science via:cshalizi</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/b:0c99a63cb0bf/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:papers"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:have-read"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:epistemology"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:perception"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:realism"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:cognitive-science"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:via:cshalizi"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://openreview.net/forum?id=BZ5a1r-kVsf">
    <title>A Path Towards Autonomous Machine Intelligence | OpenReview</title>
    <dc:date>2022-06-28T19:51:58+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://openreview.net/forum?id=BZ5a1r-kVsf</link>
    <dc:creator>mraginsky</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[How could machines learn as efficiently as humans and animals?  How could machines learn to reason and plan?  How could machines learn representations of percepts and action plans at multiple levels of abstraction, enabling them to reason, predict, and plan at multiple time horizons?  This position paper proposes an architecture and training paradigms with which to construct autonomous intelligent agents. It combines concepts such as configurable predictive world model, behavior driven through intrinsic motivation, and hierarchical joint embedding architectures trained with self-supervised learning.
]]></description>
<dc:subject>papers to-read AI cognitive-science self-supervised-learning autonomy</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/b:d812d6a10975/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:papers"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:to-read"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:AI"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:cognitive-science"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:self-supervised-learning"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:autonomy"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22582739/">
    <title>Reconstructing constructivism: causal models, Bayesian learning mechanisms, and the theory theory - PubMed</title>
    <dc:date>2021-05-03T21:57:34+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22582739/</link>
    <dc:creator>mraginsky</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[We propose a new version of the "theory theory" grounded in the computational framework of probabilistic causal models and Bayesian learning. Probabilistic models allow a constructivist but rigorous and detailed approach to cognitive development. They also explain the learning of both more specific causal hypotheses and more abstract framework theories. We outline the new theoretical ideas, explain the computational framework in an intuitive and nontechnical way, and review an extensive but relatively recent body of empirical results that supports these ideas. These include new studies of the mechanisms of learning. Children infer causal structure from statistical information, through their own actions on the world and through observations of the actions of others. Studies demonstrate these learning mechanisms in children from 16 months to 4 years old and include research on causal statistical learning, informal experimentation through play, and imitation and informal pedagogy. They also include studies of the variability and progressive character of intuitive theory change, particularly theory of mind. These studies investigate both the physical and the psychological and social domains. We conclude with suggestions for further collaborative projects between developmental and computational cognitive scientists. ]]></description>
<dc:subject>papers to-read cognitive-science constructivism</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/b:0ebe9c6c3713/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:papers"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:to-read"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:cognitive-science"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:constructivism"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://aeon.co/amp/essays/how-to-understand-cells-tissues-and-organisms-as-agents-with-agendas">
    <title>Cognition all the way down | Aeon</title>
    <dc:date>2020-11-29T02:15:03+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://aeon.co/amp/essays/how-to-understand-cells-tissues-and-organisms-as-agents-with-agendas</link>
    <dc:creator>mraginsky</dc:creator><dc:subject>cognitive-science agency process-philosophy have-read</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/b:42b2acdc009c/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:cognitive-science"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:agency"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:process-philosophy"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:have-read"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.cogsci.uci.edu/~ddhoff/ompref.html">
    <title>Observer Mechanics: A Formal Theory of Perception (Bennett, Hoffman, Prakash)</title>
    <dc:date>2011-01-01T19:49:25+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.cogsci.uci.edu/~ddhoff/ompref.html</link>
    <dc:creator>mraginsky</dc:creator><description><![CDATA["Observer Mechanics is an inquiry into the subject of perception. It suggests an approach to the study of perception that attempts to be both rigorous and general. A central thesis of Observer Mechanics is that every perceptual capacity (e.g., stereovision, auditory localization, sentence parsing, haptic recognition, and so on) can be described as an instance of a single formal structure: viz., an "observer.""
]]></description>
<dc:subject>books to-read complexity computation perception dynamical-systems probability multiagent-systems cognitive-science cybernetics</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/b:9139cac25623/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:books"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:to-read"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:complexity"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:computation"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:perception"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:dynamical-systems"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:probability"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:multiagent-systems"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:cognitive-science"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:cybernetics"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.ucs.louisiana.edu/~isb9112/dept/phil341/histconn.html">
    <title>&quot;A Revisionist History of Connectionism&quot;</title>
    <dc:date>2010-07-31T16:47:14+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.ucs.louisiana.edu/~isb9112/dept/phil341/histconn.html</link>
    <dc:creator>mraginsky</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[A great quote from M. Minsky: "It would seem that Perceptrons has much the same role as The Necronomicon -- that is, often cited but never read."
]]></description>
<dc:subject>history_of_cybernetics AI cognitive-science machine-learning perception connectionism neuroscience essays</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/b:72d51df8f155/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:history_of_cybernetics"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:AI"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:cognitive-science"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:machine-learning"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:perception"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:connectionism"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:neuroscience"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:essays"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~db=all~content=a906361798">
    <title>Parameters, Predictions, and Evidence in Computational Modeling: A Statistical View Informed by ACT-R - Cognitive Science: A Multidisciplinary Journal</title>
    <dc:date>2009-12-07T04:36:32+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~db=all~content=a906361798</link>
    <dc:creator>mraginsky</dc:creator><dc:subject>papers to-read statistics bayesian cognitive-science dynamical-systems via:cshalizi</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/b:93927d70b203/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:papers"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:to-read"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:statistics"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:bayesian"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:cognitive-science"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:dynamical-systems"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:mraginsky/t:via:cshalizi"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
</rdf:RDF>