Thanks for the comment. I agree valence should be the top priority & that cognitive gains are unlikely.
The main thing I was pointing at is “surely there’s useful bits about intelligence to be gathered from inside said intelligence, and people don’t seem to be putting much effort here”, but on reflection the last part seems wrong. Some neuroscientists are enlightened and haven’t figured everything out yet.
Your experience is interesting, I also want to get better at the void :)
Thanks for the comment. I agree valence should be the top priority & that cognitive gains are unlikely.
The main thing I was pointing at is “surely there’s useful bits about intelligence to be gathered from inside said intelligence, and people don’t seem to be putting much effort here”, but on reflection the last part seems wrong. Some neuroscientists are enlightened and haven’t figured everything out yet.
Your experience is interesting, I also want to get better at the void :)
It could still be true that on the margin experiential information about intelligence is useful.
I think60% I buy this.