claim
active
claim:the-specificity-problem-recurs-at-every-level-of-the-hierarchy-and-inside-every-indicator-since-asking-whether-a-system-has-a-given-feature-already-takes-a-stand-on-which-parts-of-the-human-realisation-are-essentialThe specificity problem recurs at every level of the hierarchy and inside every indicator, since asking whether a system 'has' a given feature already takes a stand on which parts of the human realisation are essential
Explains a persistent interpretive difficulty for all indicator assessments.
Source paper
extracted_from(2026) · Shamil Chandaria · Arvo Muñoz Morán · Fernando Rosas · Anil Seth +10
Neighborhood — ranked by edge-count
Papers (1)
paper
Concepts (1)
concept
- Specificity ProblemaboutShevlin's problem of which features of the human case are criterial versus contingent for consciousness; recurs at every level.
Related by similarity (8)
cosine ≥ 0.65 · no typed edgeEntities in the same semantic neighborhood but without a typed relation to this one — candidates for new edges or unrecognized duplicates.
- Parlog's merge process for client-server is unnecessarily complex; Linda's tuple operations remain flexible across problem variants.
- Canonical illustration of the Hard Problem intuition that any functional/mechanical explanation faces an explanatory gap for perception
- CIMC's distinctive position distinguishing itself from eliminativist and deflationary responses to the Hard Problem
- Central open theoretical tension raised in the discussion.
- Opening sentence defining self-evidencing.
- Acknowledged gap in CIMC's theory: the exact computational description of the perceptual regime is not yet specified
- Open theoretical problem CIMC acknowledges: precisely characterizing the representational format of perception
- Russell's statement opening Section 2 articulating the core motivation for the Contemplative AI approach