15.12.2013

The Earthian Brain--A History (II)

Introspection for Self-knowledge was not a well-marked feature of Scrutiny in the early JM2 Earth. The intellectual activity that paralleled today’s Wisdomwork was called Philosophy (love of knowledge), which was not envisaged in a reciprocal relationship with Introspection.

In fact, possesssing a collection of purportedly correct views about oneself was the highest level reached by a learned Earthian of the day, and this was rather boldly called Insight.

Study for this circumscribed body of information, "Insightwork", so to speak, was almost never a solitary activity. Insightwork was not even part of an individual experience for the JM2 Earthian. It was learned—or acquired, as is the word preferred by some schools—through a series of brief courses.

Complex for Insight-oriented Training. (Eastern Union, JY2013)
(From the e-remains of anonymous amateur recordician)

Training for Insight took several forms, but it invariably involved a healer as teacher. It is worth noting here that the JM2 Earthians felt a deep respect towards healers and usually a genuine faith in their competence—which is counterintuitive, given the level of critical sophistication they, the Earthians, had achieved at the time. The incompatibility is still an enigma. The single reasonable explanation is centered—paradoxically—around the disproportionally poor performance of the healing profession, creating a vicious chain circle reaction with the notoriously deep and omnipresent fear of disappearence that was typical of the JM 2. However, this doesn’t explain why, among the many classes that remained prestigious and authoritarian despite their limitations, this task was assigned to healers, and why wisdom was linked, among the many states of desire for the Earthians, to health.                                                                                                                                                                       

14.12.2013

The Earthian Brain--A History (I)

The Earthian brain, by way of a series of inventions it achieved, delegated computation to non-living machinery. This assignment marks the beginning of what We retrospectively designate by the name of The Age of Informatics. Julian Millenium 2 (2 JM) is the approximate and officially accepted date this era starts.  
The main characteristic of the Age of Informatics is a drastic increase in the speed of information processing. Although the name is appropriate, it fails to imply the Earthians’ failure to foresee the divergence of reasoning and virtue-regulation from computation in terms of speed and accuracy: This age is characterized by not only a drastic increase in the speed and an alteration in ways of obtaining collecting and processing information, but also by the dissolution of knowledge and its replacement by an ever-expanding bulk of information.
We are still far from understanding why the influential scholars of one of the most intelligent 2nd JM genera could not figure out a basic canon: Computation speed is a prerequisite for the maintenance of sound reasoning; it is not sufficient to even initiate one.
One theory is based on an analogy between the infophilic culture that prevailed in the 2nd JM Earth and the pagan beliefs of the previous JM, which shared a tendency to worship created or constructed phenomena: Some rigid and primitive idealization must have blinded the intelligent Earthians to the basic canon. Some speculaticians go as far as to suggest that it must have been no less than a religion to have blinded Earthian scholars to such a simple fact—a religion lacking only in the classical revelation incidents typical of the belief organizations of the -1st and the 1st Millenia that centered around a Creator. However, this theory fails to explain why, unlike previous religions of Creation, the revelations never became disclosed later.

To be cont'd

3.12.2013

AÜTF Nöropsikiyatri Birimi Çarşamba Toplantıları--Aralık 2013

04.12.2013
DEHB’de fNIRS çalışmaları
Dr. Özgür ÖNER, AÜTF ÇRS AD
11.12.2013
Derin beyin stimulasyonunun hayvan modelleri: Nukleus akumbens stimulasyonunun davranışsal etkileri
Dr. Koray BAŞAR, HÜTF Psikiyatri AD
18.12.2013
EU-GEI (Şizofrenide gen çevre etkileşimi) çalışması: Yöntem ve ilk bulgular
Dr. Meram Can SAKA, AÜTF Psikiyatri AD
25.12.2013
Erişkinlerde otizm spektrum bozukluğu: Vaka serisi
Dr. Cem ATBAŞOĞLU, AÜTF Psikiyatri AD


Toplantılar AÜTF Psikiyatri Anabilim Dalı kütüphanesinde 12.30-13.30'da yapılmaktadır. 

NP konseyi: İlginç veya zor vakaların tartışılması için her Çarşamba ek toplantı saati ayrılabilir. Tel: 595 66 15

2.12.2013

Bayesian probabilities in the Beads task

Same conclusion with the proper calculation as in Bayes' theorem:
Assume that red is the majority in jar A and green in jar B and the distributions of M and m in the two jars are the inverse of one another and the number of beads are equal in the two jars , e.g. if jar A contains 9 reds and 1 green, jar B has 1 red and 9 greens; if A has 68 reds and 38 greens B has 38 reds and 68 greens.

For the condition of the 9 + 1 versus 1 + 9 distribution:
Probability that the bead is red, given that it is from jar A= 9/10.
Probability that the bead is red, given that it is from jar B= 1/10.

Probability that the bead is red AND it is from jar A= (1/2) . (9/10)
Probability that the bead is red AND it is from jar B= (1/2) . (1/10)

Probability that the bead is from jar A given that it is red 
= Probability that the bead is red given that it is from jar A . Probability that the bead is from jar A / Probability in this condition that any bead is red
Probability that the bead is red given that it is from jar A . Probability that the bead is from jar A / (Probability that a bead is red and it is from jar A + Probability that a bead is red and it is from jar B)
= (9/10) . (1/2)  / [(9/10) . (1/2) + (1/10) . (1/2)]
= (9/10) . (1/2)

Probability that the bead is from jar B given that it is red 
= Probability that the bead is red given that it is from jar B . Probability that the bead is from jar B / Probability in this condition that any bead is red
Probability that the bead is red given that it is from jar B . Probability that the bead is from jar B / (Probability that a bead is red and it is from jar A + Probability that a bead is red and it is from jar B)
= (1/10) . (1/2) / [(9/10) . (1/2) + (1/10) . (1/2)]
= (1/2) . (1/10)
   

Probability that the bead is from jar A given that it is red, briefly P(a)
Probability that the bead is from jar B given that it is red, briefly P(b)
Draw 1
(observation 1)
(9/10) . (1/2)
(1/10) . (1/2)
Draw 2
(observation 2)
[(9/10) . (1/2)]²
[(1/10) . (1/2)]²
Draw n
(observation n)
[(9/10) . (1/2)] to the power of n
[(1/10) . (1/2)] to the power of n

If m is smaller than M and all the quantities m, M and n are positive integers
[M/(m+M) . (1/2)] to the power of n is bigger than [m/(m+M) . (1/2)] to the power of n

Therefore, p(a) is bigger than p(b) for any n.

In our case:
Probability that the bead is from the jar where the beads that are of the same color constitute the majority is greater than the probability that it is from the jar where beads that are of the same color are in the minority, and this is independent from the number of observations.

The probability for either of the two cases will decrease with each draw.
Decrease with every new draw in the smaller probability is bigger than the decrease in the larger probability, i.e. the decrease in the likelihood that the bead is from the jar where it is in the minority is sharper compared to the decrease in the likelihood that the bead is from the jar where it is in the majority. However, this is irrelevant, since the difference between the two probabilities is absolute.