I don’t think that’s what’s happening in me or other people. Or at least, I don’t think it’s a full description. One reason I don’t, is that after I’ve e.g. been camping for a long time, with a lot of room for quiet, it becomes easier than it has been to notice that I don’t have to see things the way I’ve been seeing them. My priors become “less stuck”, if you like. I don’t see why that would be, on your (zhukeepa’s) model.
Introspectively, I think it’s more like, that sometimes facing an unknown hypothesis (or rather, a hypothesis that’ll send the rest of my map into unknownness) is too scary to manage to see as a possibility at all.
Very late, but I think the comment you replied to does match my experience. I have a terrible memory, and this is an algorithm that is mostly functional even without the ability to reliably remember specific evidence (except of course when it completely falls apart).
Example: Walking in the woods, you see something white on the ground. You don’t look at it closely, because nothing in your hypothesis set says that it’s likely to be important. It does not act as evidence to update any of your hypotheses because you don’t pay attention to it, and makes so little impression on you that you don’t remember it at all. Repeat forever, evidence that could update you towards “polar bear” rounds to zero every time.
I agree an algorithm could do as you describe.
I don’t think that’s what’s happening in me or other people. Or at least, I don’t think it’s a full description. One reason I don’t, is that after I’ve e.g. been camping for a long time, with a lot of room for quiet, it becomes easier than it has been to notice that I don’t have to see things the way I’ve been seeing them. My priors become “less stuck”, if you like. I don’t see why that would be, on your (zhukeepa’s) model.
Introspectively, I think it’s more like, that sometimes facing an unknown hypothesis (or rather, a hypothesis that’ll send the rest of my map into unknownness) is too scary to manage to see as a possibility at all.
Very late, but I think the comment you replied to does match my experience. I have a terrible memory, and this is an algorithm that is mostly functional even without the ability to reliably remember specific evidence (except of course when it completely falls apart).
Example: Walking in the woods, you see something white on the ground. You don’t look at it closely, because nothing in your hypothesis set says that it’s likely to be important. It does not act as evidence to update any of your hypotheses because you don’t pay attention to it, and makes so little impression on you that you don’t remember it at all. Repeat forever, evidence that could update you towards “polar bear” rounds to zero every time.