Delusions and the Predictive Mind.

A growing number of studies in both the scientific and the philosophical literature have drawn on a Bayesian predictive processing framework to account for the formation of delusions. The key here is that delusions form because of disrupted prediction error signalling. Parrott's recent critique argu...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Australasian Journal of Philosophy Vol. 102; no. 4; pp. 1014 - 1030
Main Authors: Bongiorno, Federico, Corlett, Philip R
Format: Article
Published: Taylor & Francis Ltd Dec2024
Subjects:
Online Access:View this record in EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=180386882&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 180386882
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        00048402
        BHK
      jtl: Australasian Journal of Philosophy
      issn: 00048402
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Dec2024
      vid: 102
      iid: 4
      pid: 377
      pub: Taylor & Francis Ltd
    artinfo:
      ui:
        180386882
        10.1080/00048402.2023.2293825
      ppf: 1014
      ppct: 16
      formats:
        fmt:
          – @attributes:
              type: T
          – @attributes:
              type: P
              size: 1.3MB
      tig:
        atl: Delusions and the Predictive Mind.
      aug:
        au:
          Bongiorno, Federico
          Corlett, Philip R
        affil:
          University of Oxford
          Yale University
      su:
        Delusions
        Philosophy
        Statistical hypothesis testing
        Bayesian analysis
        Statistical decision making
      sug:
        subj:
          Delusions
          Philosophy
          Statistical hypothesis testing
          Bayesian analysis
          Statistical decision making
      keyword:
        delusions
        prediction error
        predictive processing
      ab: A growing number of studies in both the scientific and the philosophical literature have drawn on a Bayesian predictive processing framework to account for the formation of delusions. The key here is that delusions form because of disrupted prediction error signalling. Parrott's recent critique argues that the framework is incomplete in two respects: (i) it leaves unclear why delusional hypotheses are selected over none at all, or over more plausible alternatives; and (ii) it leaves unclear how exactly it is that delusional hypotheses are generated in the first place. In this paper, we defend the framework's explanatory power by way of showing how it can go a long way in helping disentangle these concerns. We take up each of them in turn. As for the first, our argument turns on two claims: (a) believing nothing, although possible in principle, may not be a viable procedure in the circumstances; and (b) alternative hypotheses may be rendered unavailable for selection, due to aberrant prediction errors. As for the second concern, we distinguish three ways in which delusional hypotheses may be initially acquired, all of which are based on experience broadly construed.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: Y
      custom: Copyright of Australasian Journal of Philosophy is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
      item: Australasian Journal of Philosophy
      holder: Taylor & Francis Ltd
      dt:
        @attributes:
          year: 2024
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N