» Articles » PMID: 27777555

The Predictive Processing Paradigm Has Roots in Kant

Overview
Specialty Neurology
Date 2016 Oct 26
PMID 27777555
Citations 20
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Predictive processing (PP) is a paradigm in computational and cognitive neuroscience that has recently attracted significant attention across domains, including psychology, robotics, artificial intelligence and philosophy. It is often regarded as a fresh and possibly revolutionary paradigm shift, yet a handful of authors have remarked that aspects of PP seem reminiscent of the work of 18th century philosopher Immanuel Kant. To date there have not been any substantive discussions of how exactly PP links back to Kant. In this article, I argue that several core aspects of PP were anticipated by Kant (1996/1787) in his works on perception and cognition. Themes from Kant active in PP include: (1) the emphasis on "top-down" generation of percepts; (2) the role of "hyperpriors"; (3) the general function of "generative models"; (4) the process of "analysis-by-synthesis"; and (5) the crucial role of imagination in perception. In addition to these, I also point out that PP echoes Kant's general project in that it aims to explain how minds track causal structure in the world using only sensory data, and that it uses a reverse-engineer or "top-down" method of analysis. I then locate a possible source of Kant's influence on PP by tracing the paradigm back to Hermann von Helmholtz, who saw himself as providing a scientific implementation of Kant's conclusions. I conclude by arguing that PP should not be regarded as a new paradigm, but is more appropriately understood as the latest incarnation of an approach to perception and cognition initiated by Kant and refined by Helmholtz.

Citing Articles

Primary Appraisal is Affective not Cognitive: Exploring a Revised Transactional Model of Stress and Coping.

Steffen P, Anderson T Appl Psychophysiol Biofeedback. 2025; .

PMID: 40056329 DOI: 10.1007/s10484-025-09699-w.


Enhanced visual contrast suppression during peak psilocybin effects: Psychophysical results from a pilot randomized controlled trial.

Swanson L, Jungers S, Varghese R, Cullen K, Evans M, Nielson J J Vis. 2024; 24(12):5.

PMID: 39499526 PMC: 11540033. DOI: 10.1167/jov.24.12.5.


Active Inference and Social Actors: Towards a Neuro-Bio-Social Theory of Brains and Bodies in Their Worlds.

Cheadle J, Davidson-Turner K, Goosby B Kolner Z Soz Sozpsychol. 2024; 76(3):317-350.

PMID: 39429464 PMC: 11485288. DOI: 10.1007/s11577-024-00936-4.


Comprehensive investigation of predictive processing: A cross- and within-cognitive domains fMRI meta-analytic approach.

Costa C, Pezzetta R, Masina F, Lago S, Gastaldon S, Frangi C Hum Brain Mapp. 2024; 45(12):e26817.

PMID: 39169641 PMC: 11339134. DOI: 10.1002/hbm.26817.


Conscious imagination vs. unconscious imagination: a contribution to the discussion with Amy Kind.

Jaworska A Front Psychol. 2024; 15:1310701.

PMID: 39118843 PMC: 11306181. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1310701.


References
1.
Dayan P, Hinton G, Neal R, Zemel R . The Helmholtz machine. Neural Comput. 1995; 7(5):889-904. DOI: 10.1162/neco.1995.7.5.889. View

2.
Friston K, Lawson R, Frith C . On hyperpriors and hypopriors: comment on Pellicano and Burr. Trends Cogn Sci. 2012; 17(1):1. DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2012.11.003. View

3.
Srinivasan M, Laughlin S, Dubs A . Predictive coding: a fresh view of inhibition in the retina. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 1982; 216(1205):427-59. DOI: 10.1098/rspb.1982.0085. View

4.
Engel A, Fries P, Singer W . Dynamic predictions: oscillations and synchrony in top-down processing. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2001; 2(10):704-16. DOI: 10.1038/35094565. View

5.
Bubic A, von Cramon D, Schubotz R . Prediction, cognition and the brain. Front Hum Neurosci. 2010; 4:25. PMC: 2904053. DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2010.00025. View