Psycho-Babble Social | for general support | Framed
This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | List of forums | Search | FAQ

Re: why would you train a dog to detect cancer?

Posted by alexandra_k on May 21, 2021, at 7:43:27

In reply to Re: why would you train a dog to detect cancer?, posted by alexandra_k on May 21, 2021, at 7:33:46

if a neurone could talk what would it say?

bleep bleep bleepity bleep bleep.

i'm trying to understand the programme...

so you show it a picture... something with a hard edge, say. black and then white. and you record from neurones. bleep. bleep. bleepity bleep.

and 'cracking the neural code' would be... what, exactly.


i'm trying to understand what that would or could look like.

suppose we find a 1:1 correlation. i know we haven't. but suppose that we did.

wouldn't that be like the map with the 1:1 ratio that you couldn't unroll for fear of upsetting the farmers? what does that mean. i'm not sure. in this context i think it means something like: a restatement or repetition of the explanadum is not iteself an explanation. it is not even illuminating.

but somehow that was the 'best case' -- right? we might find a neurone that fires when (and only when) one is looking at a picture of ones grandmother.

or maybe looking at a microscope picture of cancer.

historical slides that developed into. you know. after years and years and years and years of no intervention.

but no 1:1 correlation. hard to know what that would look like given the neurone fires or doesn't. fires at some base frequency. then alters the firing which must signal... something...

if we could find a correlation (at some level of analysis). right?

oh... a particular neurone is irrelevant. really it's populations of neurones coding for things. so a activity distributed across an area. just as well because many of our detection techniques are coarse grained.

but now what are we looking at or for? blippity blip beep beep? a correlation (at some level of analysis)?

what would a correlation at any level of analysis... how would that help explain?

finding the homunculus in the brain isn't a solution it's simply a restatement of the problem. the problem recurs. i don't understand this as a research project that apparently justifies...

the murder of animals.

to crack the neural code.

which is... what, exactly? trying to get a handle on what that would even look like...

trying to understand or comprehend the research project...

dismantling the computer trying to find where my essay of last month got to...

but all this was worked out... yawn...




Post a new follow-up

Your message only Include above post

Notify the administrators

They will then review this post with the posting guidelines in mind.

To contact them about something other than this post, please use this form instead.


Start a new thread

Google www
Search options and examples
[amazon] for

This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | FAQ
Psycho-Babble Social | Framed

poster:alexandra_k thread:1115219