I have been thinking about that
because mice for example
obviously they don't go into a room
they don't open a door to go into a room
but they have burrows and things like that
they go underground and they may have rooms
and they may have rooms, that will have different acoustics.
Often when you are moving through open space,
the sound of a river - let's say -
can come quite suddenly
depending on the geography.
So you can have instances, where the sound is more gradual.
But you can also have instances, where there is a sudden increase
or change in the acoustics.
So I think that relationship between movement
an how sound changes
is extremely evelutionary relevant for all animals.
That's because we have the anechoic space, the anechoic chamber.
That is very artificial.
If you are out there in the real life
in real world
relevant
you will basically have always reflections
and if it's just the reflection on the ground.
The only time when you don't have that
if you are on the top of the mountain and there is fresh snow.
The limitation in improving brain reading,
so these techniques that map mental states
to brain states,
is not just the limitation of MRI.
That is a big problem.
But the biggest problem is actually
that you need labels when you use machine learning approaches.
A lable means:
What is the person, who is in my scanner, is experiencing right now?
And this is a problem of phenomenology.
That is actually one of the biggest challenges in this field.
In my eyes, we have a fundamental
possibly even principle limitation in phenomenology.
Oh sure dualismus is
not a very convincing position.
But as long as monism
only offers a stupid explanation,
Yes please let's drive for dualism
just to keep the question open.
I am joking, but I mean this very seriously.
So far neuro science does not offer us
any convincing explanation.
Nobody doubts
that emotions are bodily processes
that thinking is related to bodily processes.
But ther is no clue
how these bodily processes
are related to what's meaningful
in the way how we interpret
and experience our emotions
or how we develop thoughts.
And I think this brings to the point
what self-organization is:
because you have microsopic rule
and you get a macroscopic pattern
which is not represented in this microsopic rule.
What I wanted to comment
on your stochasticity and hidden rules.
I really like the idea of unfolding:
unfolding is where a factor of time plays a role
and choices are made.
But once you make one choice
you have only another choice to make and not all freedom of choices.
And that's a kind of evolutionary system.
Maybe you can think for the next symposium of this sort
to invite some sort of developmental biologist
to speak about it from a conceptual point of view.
That would spice up the discussion.
Art exists right in the moment
or flourishs,
it grows from its humus,
when it starts to speak to its surroundings.
And this enviroment is reacting,
when this impulse
creates a resonance.
The resonance in turn
leads to an interpretation.
Then you are involved in a process
and that is a negotiation.
That is what art stands for to me.
Dissonance is something completely different
in my opinion, at least in science:
This is rather the primal confusion,
the origin for everything
you want to discover
is the initial confusion
provoking questions how can that be?
That makes no sense.
And this dissonance is exactly what drives us all the time.
This is exactly, what we are looking for.
I do not believe in mythologies of self-organisation and
self-organising systems, as long as there are still humans involved.
However, there are always moments
when biological complexity
can actually become a role model
and continues to set the standard.
That is actually basically the ideal case.
Because what we now have with new network grammars
in machine learning and AI
is still based on crude simplifications.
And precisely these insight such as
how to generate the motives in the network
and what are the learning rules,
that you implement there,
this requires mental work
and also accumulation of evidence.
That is essentially where I think investments need to be made,
really into theory.
This changed obviously in the late
sixties and seventies,
when this word neuro science also came up.
That's a kind of process.
That's not without complications,
that we now take this for granted
that these transfers can be made.
Well, just speaking personally,
the greatest feeling of happiness is there,
when you disprove yourself.
In other words, when you ultimately realise
that what you previously assumed
with a certain satisfaction
is actually quite different.
And that's just exactly it,
that is really the moment when you have found something new -
that is THE moment!