@tyrell_turing@fediscience.org @pinecone@mastodon.social @knutson_brain@sfba.social @awaisaftab@mastodon.social @NicoleCRust@neuromatch.social @summerfieldlab@qoto.org @Neurograce@mastodon.online @eikofried@mastodon.online In the spirit of non-reductionism, I was going off on a tangent. There are lots of straightforward papers and books about information theory applied to neuroscience -- I've found about 22 so far and am starting to dig through them -- but understanding the hisorical context and motivations of it and deconstructing the definition of information felt to be of epistemological value. These conversations end up coming down to preferences and biases: do you like thinking through a computational lens or not? Someone who does might point out how neurons are fundamentally universal Turing machines and someone who doesn't might not think that's relevant (i.e., to psychology and behavior, or neurology/medicine). I felt impelled to zoom out a bit