Limits of perfect access and the microprocessor analogy

Why do science and philosophy so often stand apart - and what happens when they come back together?In this thought-provoking conversation, Dr Tevin Naidu brings together Prof Lauren Ross (philosopher of science, UC Irvine) and Prof Megan Peters (computational neuroscientist, UC Irvine) to explore why modern science still depends on philosophical insight - and why philosophy needs to engage with empirical rigor.TIMESTAMPS:(00:00) - Introduction: Why science and philosophy need each other(01:45) - Science vs. Philosophy: debunking the "anything goes" myth(06:22) - What scientists misunderstand about philosophy(09:38) - Philosophy and science as synergistic collaborators(34:40) - Brains as model-builders: uncertainty, inference, and subjective experience(37:47) - How noise & variability reveal links between brain models and experience(39:39) - What counts as an explanation? Descriptions vs. why-questions in science(41:19) - Defining the explanatory target in consciousness research (contrast & clarity)(44:27) - Types of explanation: causal, mechanistic, computational, and mathematical(47:28) - Levels of analysis: Marr, models, and matching methods to questions(57:23) - The microprocessor/Mario example: what "perfect access" still fails to explain(58:50) - Groundbreaking work: metacognition, psychophysics & linking model knobs to experience(59:59) - Processing "under the hood": what the brain does without subjective access(01:00:01) - Vision science & the limits of introspection: implications for consciousness studies(01:26:39) - Is consciousness an epiphenomenon? Debate and conceptual framing(01:28:24) - Precision of questions: why asking the right question matters for explanation(01:29:54) - Plurality of explanatory targets: accepting piecemeal explanations for complex systems(01:42:22) - Community & interdisciplinarity: building networks that bridge science and philosophy(01:44:32) - Future horizons for consciousness research: what philosophy must confront next(02:06:36) - Final reflections: how a philosophically informed neuroscience could reshape the field(02:08:05) - ConclusionEPISODE LINKS:- Megan's Website: https://www.meganakpeters.org/- Megan's Lab: https://www.cnclab.io/- Neuromatch: https://neuromatch.io/- Megan's LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/megan-peters-58a86133/- Megan's X: https://twitter.com/meganakpeters- Could a Neuroscientist Understand a Microprocessor: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005268- Neuromatch’s Consciousness Day in the neuroAI course: https://neuroai.neuromatch.io/tutorials/W2D5_Mysteries/chapter_title.html- Lauren's Website: https://sites.socsci.uci.edu/~rossl/- Lauren's X: https://twitter.com/proflaurenross- Lauren's LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/lauren-ross-48522843/- Explanation in Biology: https://www.cambridge.org/core/elements/explanation-in-biology/743A8C5A6E709B1E348FCD4D005C67B3CONNECT:- Website: https://mindbodysolution.org - YouTube: https://youtube.com/@MindBodySolution- Podcast: https://creators.spotify.com/pod/show/mindbodysolution- Twitter: https://twitter.com/drtevinnaidu- Facebook: https://facebook.com/drtevinnaidu - Instagram: https://instagram.com/drtevinnaidu- LinkedIn: https://linkedin.com/in/drtevinnaidu- Website: https://tevinnaidu.com=============================Disclaimer: The information provided on this channel is for educational purposes only. The content is shared in the spirit of open discourse and does not constitute, nor does it substitute, professional or medical advice. We do not accept any liability for any loss or damage incurred from you acting or not acting as a result of listening/watching any of our contents. You acknowledge that you use the information provided at your own risk. Listeners/viewers are advised to conduct their own research and consult with their own experts in the respective fields.