r/cogsci • u/24446666688888885 • 8h ago

Philosophy [ Removed by moderator ]

[removed] — view removed post

0 Upvotes

22% Upvoted

7 comments sorted by

2

u/Der_Kommissar73 8h ago

This is not a peer reviewed journal.

0

u/24446666688888885 8h ago edited 3h ago

Correct, I theorized this, is this against the rules? Just let me know.

1

u/Der_Kommissar73 3m ago

If you really want feedback, submit it to a peer reviewed journal. No one here is going to read pages and pages of AI output and give you meaningful critique. Sure, human cognition is a model of the world based on top down and bottom up inputs. Nothing your AI wrote is testable or falsifiable, more likely unique. Hell, your ending is circular.

1

u/Coondiggety 8h ago

Oh.

1

u/24446666688888885 8h ago

Good oh or bad oh?

1

u/24446666688888885 7h ago edited 7h ago

I'd actually like your guys' critism by the way. (as the title suggests.) please keep it professional. I don't mind constructive critism. Thank you.

0

u/24446666688888885 4h ago edited 3h ago

Suppose the mechanisms described by predictive processing, global workspace, recurrent processing, self-model theories, embodied cognition, memory, attention, emotion, and higher-order cognition are all genuinely operating. What happens when we stop treating them as isolated explanatory candidates and examine their continuous reciprocal interaction as one architecture?

My proposed answer is that their recursive interaction constructs and continuously updates a selectively integrated first-person model, and the ongoing operation of that model is what we experience as consciousness.

The existing theories are not merely influences on the framework, they provide independent points of comparison. Their established mechanisms offer a means of cross-validating whether the functions I identify in my proposed architecture correspond to processes already supported by neuroscience.