You can also think about the other direction in the abstraction stack. What sort of homeostasis you’re trying to maintain and extend somewhat constrains an ontology which somewhat constrains an epistemology. i.e. Your sensors constrain what sort of thoughts you can think. Church-turing thesis is weird precisely because it says maybe not?
epistemics [physics, implementation level]->ontological commitments->ontology [information theory, algorithmic level]->teleological commitments->teleology [?, computational level]
You can also think about the other direction in the abstraction stack. What sort of homeostasis you’re trying to maintain and extend somewhat constrains an ontology which somewhat constrains an epistemology. i.e. Your sensors constrain what sort of thoughts you can think. Church-turing thesis is weird precisely because it says maybe not?
See also: Quine’s ship of Neurath. (or Neurathian bootstrap)
You’d likely enjoy Nozick’s Invariances if you haven’t seen it yet, he was also thinking in this direction IMO.
There’s also quantum decision theory. The way I’d put this is, “beliefs are for actions”.