**How to communicate science to the public?**
Angela Potochnik from the Center for Public Engagement with Science leads this workshop.
Part of The Society for Philosophy & Neuroscience activities
@socphilneuro.bsky.social
So a brain outsider had to say it...
the original hexagon does not include AI, it includes computer science. the 1978 report explicitly defined the connections. (1) doesn’t work when you swap CS for AI. idk where the AI one came from but it can’t be used interchangeably with the one that came from the Sloan Foundation special report.
RE: https://spore.social/@yoginho/115918117109281530
An updated version of my
"Re-Engineering Wimsatt for Limited Beings"
is available:
https://zenodo.org/records/20647108
It includes the revisions that were requested during peer-review.
Wimsatt is the most important philosopher of science […]
𝗕𝗿𝗮𝗶𝗻 𝗮𝘁𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗰𝘁𝗼𝗿 𝗱𝘆𝗻𝗮𝗺𝗶𝗰𝘀
Does it support a modular and hierarchical organization as the author support? Not really.
Highly distributed and multifunctional findings even in the context of a binary task!
#neuroskyence
doi.org/10.1038/s415...
The latent structures they champion (attractors, manifolds, subspaces) are as experimenter-relative as the "encoded messages" they reject, so I view it a bit as "relocating" the issues.
Seems like @romainbrette.bsky.social 's argument cuts against their alternative no less than against encoding.
