Varieties of perceptual truth and their possible evolutionary roots

Edelman, Shimon

doi:10.3758/s13423-014-0741-z

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, one of its recent incarnations (Hoffman et al, 2015; see also Hoffman, 2009Hoffman, , 2014Hoffman & Singh, 2012) so impressed the Editor of Psychonomic Bulletin and Review that it was not only published but was also featured in its own special section, with a breathless introduction (questioning whether it might be "the future of the science of the mind"; Hickok, 2015Hickok, , p. 1479, along with associated commentaries from 10 other groups and an extensive reply by the authors. Given how provocative ITP is, it is perhaps no surprise that it has also been criticized on several grounds-for example, for its (mis)characterization of veridicality (Cohen, 2015;Edelman, 2015), for its failure to consider key roles of adaptation on ontogenetic timescales (Anderson, 2015), for ignoring other experimental evidence in favor of veridicality (Pizlo, 2015), and for failing to explain how interface strategies could be functional in novel situations (Jansen, 2018).…”

Section: The Current Project: Flexible Goals and Inflexible Perceptua...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Flexible Goals Require that Inflexible Perceptual Systems Produce Veridical Representations: Implications for Realism as Revealed by Evolutionary Simulations

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How veridical is perception? Rather than representing objects as they actually exist in the world, might perception instead represent objects only in terms of the utility they offer to an observer? Previous work employed evolutionary modeling to show that under certain assumptions, natural selection favors such “strict‐interface” perceptual systems. This view has fueled considerable debate, but we think that discussions so far have failed to consider the implications of two critical aspects of perception. First, while existing models have explored single utility functions, perception will often serve multiple largely independent goals. (Sometimes when looking at a stick you want to know how appropriate it would be as kindling for a campfire, and other times you want to know how appropriate it would be as a weapon for self‐defense.) Second, perception often operates in an inflexible, automatic manner—proving “impenetrable” to shifting higher‐level goals. (When your goal shifts from “burning” to “fighting,” your visual experience does not dramatically transform.) These two points have important implications for the veridicality of perception. In particular, as the need for flexible goals increases, inflexible perceptual systems must become more veridical. We support this position by providing evidence from evolutionary simulations that as the number of independent utility functions increases, the distinction between “interface” and “veridical” perceptual systems dissolves. Although natural selection evaluates perceptual systems only on their fitness, the most fit perceptual systems may nevertheless represent the world as it is.

show abstract