I think you’re framing the intuition vs. systematization relationship in a limiting way. From a predictive coding perspective, these aren’t opposing traits on an “autist vs normie axis”, they’re complementary processes working within the same neural architecture.
Predictive coding research shows our brains use both bottom-up signals (intuition) and top-down predictions (systematization) in a dynamic interplay . These are integrated parts of how our brains process information. One person can excel at both.
What appears as preference for systematization reflects differences in how prediction errors are weighted and processed—not a fundamental limitation. You can develop both capacities because they use the same underlying predictive machinery.
I would, however, agree with your take that most people don’t do this but that is because they generally don’t search for prediction error after a certain point since it is easier to just live in your secure bubble. So you’re right in that this is probably how it looks like in practice since people will just use the strat (top-down systemization or bottom-up intuition) that has lead to the most amount of reward in the past.
Predictive coding research shows our brains use both bottom-up signals (intuition) and top-down predictions (systematization) in a dynamic interplay . These are integrated parts of how our brains process information. One person can excel at both.
I think you’re framing the intuition vs. systematization relationship in a limiting way. From a predictive coding perspective, these aren’t opposing traits on an “autist vs normie axis”, they’re complementary processes working within the same neural architecture.
Predictive coding research shows our brains use both bottom-up signals (intuition) and top-down predictions (systematization) in a dynamic interplay . These are integrated parts of how our brains process information. One person can excel at both.
What appears as preference for systematization reflects differences in how prediction errors are weighted and processed—not a fundamental limitation. You can develop both capacities because they use the same underlying predictive machinery.
I would, however, agree with your take that most people don’t do this but that is because they generally don’t search for prediction error after a certain point since it is easier to just live in your secure bubble. So you’re right in that this is probably how it looks like in practice since people will just use the strat (top-down systemization or bottom-up intuition) that has lead to the most amount of reward in the past.
Shorter blog on how emotions interact with this hierarchical processing system—https://blog.dropbox.com/topics/work-culture/the-mind-at-work—lisa-feldman-barrett-on-the-metabolism-of-emot
Relating this to Kahnemahns’s system 1 and 2 work—https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8979207/
edit: first link was formatted wrong.
Link is broken, can you reshare?
Fixed the comment, thanks!
(Here it is otherwise:) https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5390700/