(moral foundations theory (jonathan haidt

Six Moral Foundations

1. Care-Harm

2. Liberty-Oppression

3. Fairness-Cheating

4. Loyalty-Betrayal

5. Authority-Subversion

6. Sanctity-Degredation


Non-Epistemic Ranking Criteria

4-E Cognition

Addendum from John Vervaeke

The Oxford Handbook of 4E Cognition

Edited by Albert Newen, Leon De Bruin, and Shaun Gallagher

1. Embodied: This dimension emphasizes the role of the body and its interactions with the environment in shaping cognition. It recognizes that cognitive processes are not solely happening in the brain but are also influenced by the body's interactions and experiences in the world.

2. Embedded: The embedded dimension highlights how cognition is embedded or situated within a broader context or environment. It emphasizes that cognitive processes are not isolated but are deeply intertwined with the physical, social, and cultural aspects of the environment.

3. Extended: This dimension focuses on the idea that cognitive processes can extend beyond the boundaries of an individual's brain and body. It acknowledges that cognitive activities can be augmented or supported by external tools, technologies, or resources such as calculators, smartphones, notebooks, or even social networks.

4. Enactive: The enactive dimension emphasizes that cognition is not merely a process of information processing, but it is fundamentally linked to action and perception. It highlights the reciprocal relationship between an agent's actions and their perception of the world, suggesting that cognition emerges through this dynamic interplay between action and perception.

Added by John Vervaeke:

5. Exapted: This dimension emphasizes the idea of exaptation, which refers to the process by which existing cognitive capacities or structures are repurposed or co-opted for new functions. Exaptation recognizes that cognitive processes can evolve and adapt over time, utilizing pre-existing mechanisms in novel and unforeseen ways.

6. Emotional: The emotional dimension highlights the role of emotions in cognition. It recognizes that emotions are not separate from cognitive processes but are intricately intertwined with them. Emotions can shape and influence our perceptions, attention, decision-making, and overall cognitive functioning.

7. Ecological: The ecological dimension emphasizes the ecological niche or environment in which cognition takes place. It recognizes that cognition is deeply situated within a specific ecological context and is shaped by the affordances and constraints of that environment. This dimension highlights the interplay between the organism and its ecological niche, with cognition emerging from this interaction.

recursive relevance realization

From the Work of John Vervaeke

Recursive relevance realization is a concept introduced by John Vervaeke in his work on cognitive science and consciousness. It refers to a fundamental process through which our cognition recursively engages with the world, constantly seeking and creating patterns of meaning that are relevant to our goals and purposes.

In this context, "recursive" means that the process of relevance realization operates at multiple levels and is continually refined and updated through feedback loops. It involves an ongoing feedback loop between perception, attention, memory, and action, where each iteration contributes to the construction and refinement of relevant patterns of meaning.

"Relevance realization" refers to the cognitive process of identifying and engaging with patterns of significance and meaning in our environment. It involves the capacity to discern what is relevant and important to us, both in terms of our immediate goals and broader existential concerns. Relevance realization allows us to navigate the world, make decisions, solve problems, and find purpose and meaning in our experiences.

The concept of recursive relevance realization highlights the dynamic and iterative nature of cognition, where our cognitive processes constantly interact with the world, seeking and constructing patterns of relevance that guide our understanding and action. It is a foundational aspect of how we make sense of the world and engage with it in a meaningful way.

predictive processing

From the Work of John Vervaeke

Predictive processing is a theoretical framework in cognitive science and neuroscience that proposes that the brain actively generates predictions about incoming sensory information to make sense of the world. It suggests that perception and cognition are based on the brain's ability to generate and update predictions about the causes and likely future sensory inputs.

According to the predictive processing framework, the brain continuously generates predictions or hypotheses about the sensory information it expects to receive based on prior knowledge and internal models of the world. These predictions are then compared to the actual sensory inputs received from the environment. Any discrepancies or prediction errors between the predicted and actual sensory inputs are used to update the internal models, reducing the prediction errors over time.

The brain aims to minimize prediction errors by adjusting its internal models and predictions, refining its expectations about the world. This iterative process allows the brain to generate more accurate predictions, improving its understanding and perception of the environment.

Predictive processing suggests that perception is not simply a passive process of receiving and processing sensory inputs but an active and predictive process. By generating and updating predictions, the brain actively constructs our perceptual experience, inferring the causes and meaning behind sensory information.

This framework has been influential in various fields, including cognitive science, neuroscience, and artificial intelligence, providing a theoretical framework for understanding perception, cognition, learning, and the interaction between top-down predictions and bottom-up sensory inputs.

rule omega


Rule Omega is actually a really simple, practical thing towards coherence that I would like everybody here to get. If Jordan and I are talking, or you and I are talking, like we have this, and I think we naturally have it. It's worth making explicit. If you say something that sounds ridiculous to me or bat$#!t crazy or wrong, I actually give the benefit of the doubt that you might have a reason that I didn't understand…first. So rather than just default into "you're probably wrong," I'll ask more questions, and that, giving the benefit of the doubt that you actually might have something useful to say, increases my making sure that I understand you before I'm responding. And that actually… and the disagreeing with something that you weren't even saying because I didn't seek to understand well enough, creates very turbulent flow rather than laminar flow, breaks down coherence, right? If people could just do that towards coherence, if they could just give the benefit of the doubt to each other, that everyone has some signal, even if it's on a very different part of reality than the part they're focused on, and even if there's noise involved, and they're listening for the signal first, that would change everything. That's a starting place.


So, Daniel expresses something, and let’s say he's trying to express something that’s hard, which, by the way, the Rule Omega is designed for that kind of a thing. Like, I'm not interested in having conversations that aren't actually trying to break new ground. So, okay, do it, dude! So, you're expressing something hard, and in the expression, ninety-eight percent is noise, and two percent is signa. (Daniel: “Like the jazz riff.”) But what happens is that my job is to actually do two things: one, hold all of it, not just say, “F$%#! it! That wasn't a hundred percent right, so I'm just gonna nuke it." Hold all of it. Then, in my self-discernment, to what degree can I express something back that gets rid of the fifty percent that is noise. So now I've got 6% signal. Express it back. And of course, if you can then do that, and now you…three is even better, a more profound instrument because you're gonna be bringing a different perspective. Perhaps you can take it and actually zoom in on it down to the point where it’s actually 50% signal. That's the idea.

So, one, it's an invitation to say, "Hey, we're trying to do something that’s hard. Let's all try to do something that's hard, and be willing to take the risk of not speaking elegantly and on the premise that everyone else is doing their absolute level best to hear that which is trying to speak itself through you and listening to them in themselves, like, "Oh, there it is! Tone, got it! There's something beautiful and clear there. Here's what I heard." And that's Rule Omega.


And there's a psychological safety that's created to be able to try out new stuff, knowing that we know we're trying out new stuff, and we're giving the benefit of the doubt, so it actually does become more explorative, and that's where you get more novelty.


And then I imagine, I don't know if this is true for Daniel, I imagine it's true for you, but certainly, if it's true for me, is that I'm also noticing myself, like, this constant, you know, when you're meditating, you feel this constant chatter and flow of, like, all the things that are going on internally that are either, like, certain ideas are popping up or emotional responses. Some of them are like social-emotional responses, some of them are like just, "I gotta pee." And being able to actually notice all that chatter internally and do the discernment interior and say, "Okay, of all that chatter, which has a heart that's actually signal? Oh $#!t! But listen to all of it. You have to have…Rule Omega has to go in and out. Right? I'm listening to myself fully, and I'm listening to the others fully, and trying to use discernment to continuously allow that process to turn that into gold.


Now, there's a really important distinction that we're saying something that is different than the way that some people think about multiperspectivism, which is, we're not saying…I’m not saying all perspectives are equally valid, and I'm also not saying that there is no way to integrate them into higher order understanding. I'm saying all perspectives have some signal, generally have some noise, and that “perspective” is itself a reduction of information on the reality being perceived.