Diverging from Epistemic consensus
Consensus as cortical-column voting; when it fails to map territory
It’s more efficient to go from epistemic consensus and expand from that than starting off your own semantically far grounds
The cortical columns, in their world-modeling activities, work semiautonomously. What “we” perceive is a kind of democratic consensus from among them. ~ Jeff Hawkins
The brain is suspected to have a consensus among all the different building blocks of intelligence, in human culture, we all agree that this is a “tree”
This is one of the reasons why the binding problem is considered a mystery, but we have proposed an answer: columns vote. Your perception is the consensus the columns reach by voting. ~ Jeff Hawkins
But consensus does not always properly map the territory.
But if thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought ~ George Orwell
Humanity consensus can also be called memetic, and we might lose informational consensus due to hallucinations generated by artificial intelligence in the near future.