Information Integration Theory
Experimental results about mathematical models
Blame = Intent + Harm
Fair share = Contribution + Effort
Norman H. Anderson
Relating Information Integration Theory with Systems 1 and 2
I will sketch out a theory of consciousness that I think may relate your theory with that of Kahnemann and Tversky. In my theory, there are three levels of reflection:
In Kahnemann and Tversky's theory, the first two refer to their System 1 and System 2. I would say that:
In my thinking, this yields a duality of knowledge where we try to consciously model what we unconsciously know. Our unconscious speaks to our conscious with emotions, and our conscious imposes cognition on our unconscious. Neurologically, this duality is championed by the two hemispheres - typically the right hemisphere is the advocate for System 1 and the left hemisphere is the advocate for System 2. In society, similarly we have gender roles where the female role favors System 1 and the male role favors System 2.
The upshot is that we can, through consciousness, balance these two very different perspectives. This duality is also the basis for logic, as with the logical square, where we can have a dialogue between what we know and what we don't know.
Your theory has demonstrated after many experiments that there are three models that the mind implements: Averaging, Adding and Multiplying. Why these three models? My idea is that:
Then Consciousness compares what we get relating these two outlooks.
At some point, what I think I should do is go through your books, Unified Social Cognition and A Functional Theory of Cognition, and simply make a list of the experiments where the different models arise. Then I could see if my idea is tenable.
I am curious if there is anyone who is compiling lists of experiments related to your theory, and more generally, if there is anything online. I couldn't find anything.
Two self-evident propositions are basic in psychological science. The Axiom of Purposivenessrecognizes that thought and action are functional, directed toward goals. The Axiom of Integrationrecognizes that thought and action depend on joint operation of multiple variables. Two cognitive processes—valuationof stimulus informers to construct their functional, goal-relevant values and integrationof multiple values into a unitary response—are thus basic inthought and action as shown in the Information Integration Diagram (Figure 1.1). (Moral Science, page 1)
This is anti-physical in that physics admits of no goals. Also, the binding problem is that there is no physical explanation or mechanism for the integration of information. The mind is thus anti-physical.