1Z wrote: > > Brent Meeker wrote: > >> No, I think Colin has point there. Your phenomenal view adds a lot of >> assumptions to the sensory data in constructing an internal model of what >> you see. These assumptions are hard-wired by evolution. It is situations >> in which these assumptions are false that produce optical illusions. > > It depends on what you mean by information. Our hardwiring allows us to > make > better-than-chance guesses about what is really out there. But it is > not > information *about* what is really out there -- it doesn't come from > the external world in the way sensory data does.
Not in the way that sensory data does, but it comes from the external world via evolution. I'd say it's information about what's out there just as much as the sensory data is. Whether it's about what's *really* out there invites speculation about what's *really real*. I'd agree that it provides our best guess at what's real. Brent Meeker --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
