He asks questions we still don't have answers for.
His answers are probably rubbish, but that doesn't matter. Without a suggested answer, there could have been no book. The assumption is that somebody will take up the questions and get a better answer.
Similarly, the question of how we see was answered with gradually increasing merit. First rays shooting from your eyes, then rays entering your eyes, neural processing for feature extraction, and integration into the fractionated attention stream, with a wholly confabulated continuity.
I like this model of emergent (theory of) mind better. I suspect at each stage, the sensor and the sensed couple. But, I am willing to bet a snake, purely on thermal signal, can (and does) make feints to confuse prey, before striking. That means to me they have an analytical model of "if this then that" beyond the trivial.
"What it is like to be a bat" poses questions to shape and form and understanding if you intuit a higher mind lies behind the sonar.
Probably? I just don't like Jaynes and allow that to leak into a critique.
His answers are probably rubbish, but that doesn't matter. Without a suggested answer, there could have been no book. The assumption is that somebody will take up the questions and get a better answer.
Similarly, the question of how we see was answered with gradually increasing merit. First rays shooting from your eyes, then rays entering your eyes, neural processing for feature extraction, and integration into the fractionated attention stream, with a wholly confabulated continuity.