THOUGHT EXPERIMENT: The Colorblind Neuroscientist

By Staff Reporters and AI

SPONSOR: http://www.CertifiedMedicalPlanner.org

***

***

THOUGHT EXPERIMENT DEFINED

A thought experiment is a mental exercise where you imagine a situation or scenario to explore an idea, test a theory, or examine a problem. It does not involve physical experiments or data. Instead, it uses reasoning, imagination, and logic to draw conclusions or raise important questions.

INATTENTIONAL BLINDNESS: https://medicalexecutivepost.com/2025/03/11/inattentional-blindness/

Colorblind Neuroscientist [Inverted Spectrum Problem]

Sometimes referred to as the Inverted Spectrum Problem or the Knowledge Argument, this thought experiment is meant to stimulate discussions against a purely physical view of the universe, namely the suggestion that the universe, including mental processes, is entirely physical. This thought experiment tries to show that there are indeed non-physical properties — and attainable knowledge — that can only be learned through conscious experience.

The originator of the concept, Frank Jackson, explains it this way:

Mary is a brilliant scientist who is, for whatever reason, forced to investigate the world from a black and white room via a black and white television monitor. She specializes in the neuro-physiology of vision and acquires, let us suppose, all the physical information there is to obtain about what goes on when we see ripe tomatoes, or the sky, and use terms like ‘red’, ‘blue’, and so on. She discovers, for example, just which wavelength combinations from the sky stimulate the retina, and exactly how this produces via the central nervous system the contraction of the vocal cords and expulsion of air from the lungs that results in the uttering of the sentence ‘The sky is blue’…What will happen when Mary is released from her black and white room or is given a color television monitor? Will she learn anything or not?

Put another way, Mary knows everything there is to know about color except for one crucial thing: She’s never actually experienced color consciously. Her first experience of color was something that she couldn’t possibly have anticipated; there’s a world of difference between academically knowing something versus having actual experience of that thing.

COMMENTS APPRECIATED

Like and Refer

***

***

BACKFIRE: Mind Effect

By Staff Reporters

SPONSOR: http://www.MarcinkoAssociates.com

***

***

The Backfire Effect refers to the strengthening of a belief even after it has been challenged.

Cook and Lewandowsky (2011) explain it very well in the context of changing people’s minds in their Debunking Handbook. The backfire effect may work based on the same foundation as Declinism, in that we do not like change. It is also similar to negativity bias, in that we wish to avoid losing and other negative outcomes—in this case, one’s idea is being challenged or rejected (i.e. perceived as being made out to be “wrong”) and thus, they may hold on tighter to the idea than they had before.

However, according to colleague Dan Ariely PhD, there are caveats to the backfire effect—for example, we also tend to abandon a belief if there’s enough evidence against it with regard to specific facts.

***

COMMENTS APPRECIATED

Subscribe and Refer

***

GIBSON’S PARADOX: Inaccurate Economic Observations

Why were interest rates and prices correlated?

By Staff Reporters

SPONSOR: http://www.MarcinkoAssociates.com

***

***

Gibson’s paradox is based on an economic observation made by British economist Alfred Herbert Gibson regarding the positive correlation between interest rates and wholesale price levels. John Maynard Keynes later called this relationship a paradox because he claimed that it could not be explained by existing economic theories.

CITE: https://www.r2library.com/Resource/Title/0826102549

There have been possible explanations raised by economists to solve Gibson’s paradox over the decades. But as long as the relationship between interest rates and prices remains artificially de-linked, there may not be enough interest by today’s macro-economists to pursue it any further.

In the end, Gibson’s paradox was neither Gibson’s (having been previously discovered by others) nor a true paradox (as plausible explanations already existed at the time of Keynes’s writing and more have been explored since) and is of little interest beyond being a historical footnote to the gold standard era.

COMMENTS APPRECIATED

Thank You

***

***