A: Is there any water in the refrigerator? B: Yes. A: Where? I don’t see it. B: In the cells of the eggplant.
The issue here is ambiguity between root-cause analysis (nobody has channeled a container for water to be among the objects currently in the refrigerator) vs reductionism (eggplants diminish into (among lots of things) water).
The issue here is ambiguity between root-cause analysis (nobody has channeled a container for water to be among the objects currently in the refrigerator) vs reductionism (eggplants diminish into (among lots of things) water).
The problem with Bayesianism here is not that it uses binary rather than fuzzy truth-values (fuzzy truth-values don’t really solve this, as you admit, though they’re also not really incrementally closer to solving it), but rather that Bayesianism/computationalism maximizes information extraction, which is the wrong metric to use for agency created through equillibrating resources (the energy of the sun flowing through the earth out into the night).