No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Causal surgery under a Markov blanket
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 29 September 2022
Abstract
Bruineberg et al. provide compelling clarity on the roles Markov blankets could (and perhaps should) play in the study of life and mind. However, here we draw attention to a further role blankets might play: as a hypothesis about cognition itself. People and other animals may use blanket-like representations to model the boundary between themselves and their worlds.
- Type
- Open Peer Commentary
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press
References
Bortolotti, L., & Broome, M. R. (2012). Affective dimensions of the phenomenon of double bookkeeping in delusions. Emotion Review, 4(2), 187–191. https://doi.org/10.1177/1754073911430115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corlett, P. R., Honey, G. D., & Fletcher, P. C. (2016). Prediction error, ketamine and psychosis: An updated model. Journal of Psychopharmacology, 30(11), 1145–1155. https://doi.org/10.1177/0269881116650087CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dickinson, A., & Balleine, B. (1994). Motivational control of goal-directed action. Animal Learning & Behavior, 22(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03199951CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Findling, C., Skvortsova, V., Dromnelle, R., Palminteri, S., & Wyart, V. (2019). Computational noise in reward-guided learning drives behavioral variability in volatile environments. Nature Neuroscience, 22(12), 2066–2077. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41593-019-0518-9CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Frith, C. D., Blakemore, S. J., & Wolpert, D. M. (2000). Abnormalities in the awareness and control of action. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, 355(1404), 1771–1788. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2000.0734CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kepecs, A., Uchida, N., Zariwala, H. A., & Mainen, Z. F. (2008). Neural correlates, computation and behavioural impact of decision confidence. Nature, 455(7210), 227–231. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature07200CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kulakova, E., Khalighinejad, N., & Haggard, P. (2017). I could have done otherwise: Availability of counterfactual comparisons informs the sense of agency. Consciousness and Cognition, 49, 237–244. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2017.01.013CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Papineau, D., & Heyes, C. (2006). Rational or associative? Imitation in Japanese quail. In Nudds, M. & Hurley, S. (Eds.), Rational animals (pp. 187–195). Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pearl, J., Glymour, M., & Jewell, N. P. (2016). Causal inference in statistics: A primer. Wiley.Google Scholar
Penn, D. C., & Povinelli, D. J. (2007). Causal cognition in human and nonhuman animals: A comparative, critical review. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 97–118. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.58.110405.085555CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Redgrave, P., & Gurney, K. (2006). The short-latency dopamine signal: A role in discovering novel actions? Nature Reviews. Neuroscience, 7(12), 967–975. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn2022CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schmack, K., Bosc, M., Ott, T., Sturgill, J. F., & Kepecs, A. (2021). Striatal dopamine mediates hallucination-like perception in mice. Science (New York, N.Y.), 372(6537), eabf4740. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abf4740CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sharpe, M. J., Chang, C. Y., Liu, M. A., Batchelor, H. M., Mueller, L. E., Jones, J. L., … Schoenbaum, G. (2017). Dopamine transients are sufficient and necessary for acquisition of model-based associations. Nature Neuroscience, 20(5), 735–742. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.4538CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wen, W., Shibata, H., Ohata, R., Yamashita, A., Asama, H., & Imamizu, H. (2020). The active sensing of control difference. iScience, 23(5), 101112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2020.101112CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yon, D., Bunce, C., & Press, C. (2020). Illusions of control without delusions of grandeur. Cognition, 205, 104429. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2020.104429CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yon, D., & Frith, C. D. (2021). Precision and the Bayesian brain. Current Biology, 31(17), R1026–R1032. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2021.07.044CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Target article
The Emperor's New Markov Blankets
Related commentaries (35)
A continuity of Markov blanket interpretations under the free-energy principle
Against free energy, for direct perception
Bayesian realism and structural representation
Blankets, heat, and why free energy has not illuminated the workings of the brain
Boundaries and borders gone! But life goes on
Causal surgery under a Markov blanket
Does the metaphysical dog wag its formal tail? The free-energy principle and philosophical debates about life, mind, and matter
Embracing sensorimotor history: Time-synchronous and time-unrolled Markov blankets in the free-energy principle
Enough blanket metaphysics, time for data-driven heuristics
Free-energy pragmatics: Markov blankets don't prescribe objective ontology, and that's okay
Good theoretical debate, but insufficient proof of concept
Life, mind, agency: Why Markov blankets fail the test of evolution
Making life and mind as clear as possible, but not clearer
Making reification concrete: A response to Bruineberg et al.
Maps and territories, smoke, and mirrors
Markov blankets and Bayesian territories
Markov blankets and the preformationist assumption
Markov blankets as boundary conditions: Sweeping dirt under the rug still cleans the house
Markov blankets do not demarcate the boundaries of the mind
Markov blankets: Realism and our ontological commitments
Nothing but a useful tool? (F)utility and the free-energy principle
Practical implications from distinguishing between Pearl blankets and Friston blankets
Recurrent, nonequilibrium systems and the Markov blanket assumption
Redressing the emperor in causal clothing
Return of the math: Markov blankets, dynamical systems theory, and the bounds of mind
Scientific realism about Friston blankets without literalism
Spatiotemporal constraints of causality: Blanket closure emerges from localized interactions between temporally separable subsystems
The emperor has no blanket!
The empire strikes back: Some responses to Bruineberg and colleagues
The map, the territory, and the cartographer: Linking the “pure” formal models to the “murky” material world
The seductive allure of cargo cult computationalism
There is no “inference within a model”
What realism about agents requires
What's special about space?
Who tailors the blanket?
Author response
The Emperor Is Naked: Replies to commentaries on the target article