News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Your Brain Is Not An Onion With A Tiny Reptile Inside (2020) by csours on Monday September 18, 2023 @12:36PM (#37558489)
> "The triune brain hypothesis doesn't seem "wrong", it just seems like a simple categorization that is useful to the layperson."

Yes. Anything this simple will be wrong. Almost everything you learn in school before graduate level courses will be wrong. Most of it won't matter to you unless you start working in that field.

Re:Your Brain Is Not An Onion With A Tiny Reptile Inside (2020) by nuancebydefault on Monday September 18, 2023 @02:16PM (#37559864)
[1] is a nice book that explains in the first chapter why all science is wrong and gets replaced by a less wrong model, in steps. In fact the author argues that all those wrong models are perfectly fine and usable, for their period of time and applications.

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality_Is_Not_What_It_Seems

Re:Your Brain Is Not An Onion With A Tiny Reptile Inside (2020) by KMag on Monday September 18, 2023 @02:46PM (#37560293)
"All models are wrong, but some are useful" - George Box
Re:Your Brain Is Not An Onion With A Tiny Reptile Inside (2020) by dragonwriter on Monday September 18, 2023 @04:22PM (#37561502)
> Almost everything you learn in school before graduate level courses will be wrong.

From what I understand, in many fields its pretty clear that most of the stuff in graduate courses is, too, its just that then next step toward right is less clear and more disputed than for the earlier wrong stuff.

Re:Your Brain Is Not An Onion With A Tiny Reptile Inside (2020) by jfoutz on Monday September 18, 2023 @10:37PM (#37565030)
I don't know what's happening with my reptile brain that I feel I need to comment on this thread, but whatever.

I've pushed a full wheelbarrow through the mud. Aristotelian model of motion works pretty well. If I ain't push'n, it ain't movi'n

Newton came along with some new ideas. And they're really good for representing lots of motion. put a big friction component in the equation and you can see why moving the wheelbarrow is work.

The problem comes up if you take a hard line against Aristotelian model. Then Newton model of momentum is dead wrong. No other theory has been so studied, and turned out to be so very very wrong.

There are three popular (maybe?) ways people say the same thing.

"all models are wrong, but some models are useful". Is pretty much it, nails it, but feels a little stark to me.

paulg wrote about applied philosophy - http://www.paulgraham.com/philosophy.html kinda Wittgenstein. A half assed description might be, we all kinda don't listen, we don't find common ground, and so we don't communicate effectively.

The third, and my current favorite, is "context matters". Eugenia Cheng and the Join of Abstraction does this the best. In this context, this is how it works. what do you think? Do we disagree because we can't get the same context? 1+1 = 2 is probably right, but adding 1 day to a clock isn't going to help at all, it's still going to be flashing 12:00, because I never set my clocks.

Anyway, if it matters, I think you're right. At least I hope you're right in a very broad context. Not in the vary narrow, this is the latest research accessible only to those who have dedicated years to understanding. But right in the sense that lots of people are trying to do better. it might not work out, but maybe they can make the model a little (or a lot!) better.