3 ms·
meh. These are not new ideas, and probably seem rather obvious to those who think about evolution and fitness functions. I suppose however, there is some good i
by SubiculumCode 10y ago
meh. These are not new ideas, and probably seem rather obvious to those who think about evolution and fitness functions. I suppose however, there is some good in making this point more salient to cognitive science theoriticians however.
- SubiculumCode 10y agoand why was that worth -2 moderation? I AM a cognitive neuroscientist; I certainly am not denegrating them. Cognitive scientists are used to contrasting percepts with objective reality, hence all the facinating illusions they love to demonstrate. Evolutionary theorists are used to counterintuitive ideas that result from putting fitness functions at the forefront. I would not have thought that putting the two together is a new idea.
- empath75 10y agoBecause not everyone had time to think deeply about every field that everyone on HN specializes in and it's sort of pointless to complain that an article about your specialty doesn't teach you personally anything new.
- SubiculumCode 10y agoTo be specific, I was not conplaining about the article. It is an interesting subject. I was providing context for those reading the popularized article which tends to oversell these things. but whatevs