3 ms·

Is god in the image of a man? Probably not.

• virgilp 8y ago
  You're downvoted, but I think you were just pointing out the reverse causality in the parent post, right? I.e. even if our brains are Bayesian, it's not that "they use a process discovered by them", it's just that they managed to decode what is the process that they were already using. Which doesn't seem ridiculous at all.
  • User23 8y ago
    It's not even a matter of causality, it's just a category error. Are there cranial phenomena that are analogous to Bayesian statistics? I don't see why not. But that doesn't mean that is how the brain operates. It's a matter of membership not isomorphism.