It is interesting to note that a world view that is based upon a dynamic value system is similar to a Bayesian reasoner. This is a model for designing algorithms that must make decisions based upon incomplete information. Once more data is received, the degrees of plausibility that certain propositions are true are recalculated by the reasoner.
A world view based upon dynamic values changes its conclusions and outlook when its values change, and these change with experience (similar to acquiring new data in the Bayesian model).
This brings to mind a curious question: if two individuals share the exact same life experiences, are they necessarily the same person?
And to further explore this question: will differences in their physiology cause them to adopt different personalities and world views? Is it impossible to impose the exact same events in the two lives, making the question unanswerable? Because Bayesian reasoning, if it can even be correctly applied to human reasoning, is still based upon probabilities, is it actually only a question of how likely the two individuals will be more or less the same?
These thoughts have been fueled by E. T. Jaynes's "Probability Theory: The Logic of Science."
Addendum: I think the question above is only relevant within the context considering a Bayesian reasoner, i.e. not an actual human. Actual human thought is driven by more than reasonable analysis of propositions, such as physiology and emotion.
No comments:
Post a Comment