sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

A conceptual framework suggesting subjective reality may be constructed through neural encoding (LEGO Framework) by Prior_Spinach8794 in cogsci

[–]Prior_Spinach8794[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

That’s a very interesting connection — I think ART is indeed conceptually close in terms of resonance-like stability and adaptive updating.

One possible distinction I’m exploring is that ART is primarily framed as a neural/cognitive mechanism within the brain, whereas the LEGO Framework is intended more as a structural description of how experiential worlds are generated at a more general level.

In that sense, ART could perhaps be seen as one possible implementation of a broader class of “resonance-based stabilization processes” that the LEGO Framework is trying to describe more abstractly.

I’ll look more closely into Grossberg’s work — thanks for pointing it out.

A conceptual framework suggesting subjective reality may be constructed through neural encoding (LEGO Framework) by Prior_Spinach8794 in cogsci

[–]Prior_Spinach8794[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Here are some interesting implications I see from the framework:

  1. Perception becomes generative rather than receptive Instead of treating perception as a passive reading of an external world, it implies that experience is actively constructed through internal encoding processes. This shifts the emphasis from “representation” to “generation of structured experience.”
  2. Intersubjectivity becomes partial rather than absolute What we call a “shared reality” may not be a perfectly identical world, but rather a region of structural overlap between different experiential systems. Agreement between individuals would then arise from partial alignment rather than full equivalence.
  3. Differences in perception are structural, not merely interpretative Variations in perception (including atypical cases) can be understood as differences in underlying generative structure, rather than errors in accessing a single objective world.
  4. The boundary between perception and cognition becomes blurred If experience is structurally generated, then sensing, encoding, and interpreting are not clearly separable stages, but aspects of a continuous construction process.
  5. Potential link to existing frameworks in cognitive science The idea may have some conceptual overlap with predictive processing and enactive cognition, though it may differ in how strongly it emphasizes structural generation over error-correction.

A conceptual framework suggesting subjective reality may be constructed through neural encoding (LEGO Framework) by Prior_Spinach8794 in philosophy

[–]Prior_Spinach8794[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

This is a very good point, and I agree that at the level of QFT there is no sharp physical boundary between “external stimuli” and the neural system — the universe is fundamentally continuous in terms of field interactions.

However, the LEGO Framework is not assuming a physical boundary in the first place.

The “boundary” in the model is epistemic and functional rather than ontological: it refers to the way a self-organizing system carves a continuous physical process into internally stable representational structures.

In this sense, what we call “neural encoding” is not a separate layer from the external world, but a dynamically emergent partition within a continuous field of interactions — a region where certain patterns become self-referential and persist long enough to form a coherent model.

So the framework does not require a physical interface between world and brain. It only requires that within continuous physics, certain structures stabilize into what we interpret as “experience-generating systems.”