This argument reminds me of the saying that "the map is not the territory". Yes, it's true that evolution will select for organisms that are able to model/under

This argument reminds me of the saying that "the map is not the territory". Yes, it's true that evolution will select for organisms that are able to model/understand reality only to the extent that it is practically useful to them. But that still implies that their mental model has some basis in reality. Consider a map of NYC vs the actual territory of NYC. Yes, the map is only a crude approximation of the territory. Map makers (similar to evolution) are only incentivized to produce maps that are a practically useful approximation of reality, and not a fully accurate depiction of reality. But that doesn't change the fact that the map is still rooted in reality. When the map shows me that Time Square is only a short walk from Port Authority, and that the WTC is much further away, those are all facts that represent reality. Yes, it can be disconcerting to realize that what we're looking at is a map, and not the territory itself. Yes, there are limitations on how much we can learn about the territory purely from looking at a map. But that doesn't change the fact that the map is correlated with its underlying reality. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Map–territory_relation#"The_map_is_not_the_territory" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Map–territory_relation#"The_ma...