quote
active
quote:what-we-call-a-representation-is-not-a-correspondence-given-an-external-state-of-affairs-but-a-consistency-with-a-system-s-own-ongoing-maintenance-of-identityWhat we call a representation is not a correspondence given an external state of affairs, but a consistency with a system's own ongoing maintenance of identity.
Varela quote grounding the paper's final tension between representation and autonomy.
Source paper
extracted_from(2026) · Samson Abramsky · Wolfgang Banzhaf · Leo S. D. Caves · Michael Levin +4
Neighborhood — ranked by edge-count
Papers (1)
paper
Claims (1)
claim
- Final unresolved theoretical tension the paper leaves open regarding whether representation is foundational or founded on autonomy.
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.
- Final open question of the discussion, left genuinely unresolved.
- Central open theoretical tension raised in the discussion.
- Interpretive hypothesis offered to explain why emotion features are more persistent
- Trade-off between internal and public obligations.
- Open theoretical problem CIMC acknowledges: precisely characterizing the representational format of perception
- Proposal for type 1/type 2 obligations.
- Load-bearing epistemic caution the author places on the entire analytical framework.
- Author’s interpretive claim that the shared geometry is general and robust.