José M. Araya

ABSTRACTŞerife Tekin’s Reclaiming the Self in Psychiatry argues that mental distress and psychiatric disorder are best understood in relation to the self. This kind of approach confronts the Freud problem and the associated objectivity challenge. In this Commentary, I suggest a way of complementing MuSe that helps address both the Freud problem and the associated objectivity challenge. I argue that computational neurophenomenology can be naturally integrated with MuSe by providing mechanistic accounts of the dynamics underlying its distinct facets, articulated in terms of a self-model. This brings several epistemic advantages and may extend MuSe in novel directions. Because subjective experience plays a constitutive methodological role in computational neurophenomenology, this integration also strengthens the scientific standing of subjective reports within MuSe, and expands the role of MuSe’s experience-based experts in psychiatric research.

In this Thesis, I systematize, clarify, and expand the current theory of emotion based on the principles of predictive processing—the interoceptive inference view of emotion—so as to show the following: as it stands, this view is problematic. Once expanded, the view in question can deal with its more pressing problems, and it compares favourably to competing accounts. Thus, the interoceptive inference view of emotion stands out as a plausible theory of emotion. According to the predictive processing framework, all what the brain does, in all its functions, is to minimize its precision-weighted prediction error. Roughly, PE consist in the difference between the sensory signals expected from the top-down and the actual, incoming sensory signals. Now, in the PP framework, visual percepts are formed by minimizing visual PE in a specific manner: via visual perceptual inference. That is, the brain forms visual percepts in a top-down fashion by predicting its incoming lower-level sensory signals from higher-level models of the likely causes of those visual signals. Such models can be seen as putting forward content-specifying hypotheses about the object or event responsible for triggering incoming sensory activity. A contentful percept is formed once a certain hypothesis achieves to successfully match, and thus supress, current lower-level sensory signals. In the interoceptive inference approach to interoception, the principles of PP have been extended to account for interoception, i.e., the perception of our homeostatic, physiological condition. Just as perception in the visual domain arises via visual perceptual inference, the interoceptive inference approach holds that perception of the inner, physiological milieu arises via interoceptive perceptual inference. Now, what might be called the interoceptive inference theory of valence holds that the interoceptive inference approach can be used so as to account for subjective feeling states in general, i.e., mental states that feel good or bad—i.e., valenced mental states. According to ITV, affective valence arises by way of interoceptive perceptual inference. On the other hand, what might be called the interoceptive inference view of emotion holds that the interoceptive inference approach can be used so as to account for emotions per se. More precisely, IIE holds that, in direct analogy to the way in which visual percepts are formed, emotions arise from interoceptive predictions of the causes of current interoceptive afferents. In other words, emotions per se amount to interceptive percepts formed via higher-level, content-specifying emotion hypotheses. In this Thesis, I aim to systematize, clarify, and expand the interoceptive inference approach to interoception, in order to show that: contrary to non-sensory theories of affective valence, valence is indeed constituted by interoceptive perceptions, and that interoceptive percepts do arise via interoceptive perceptual inference. Therefore, ITV holds. Considering that IIE exhibits problematic assumptions, it should be amended. In this respect, I will argue that emotions do not arise via interoceptive perceptual inference, since this assumes that there must be regularities pertaining to emotion in the physiological domain. I will suggest that emotions arise instead by minimizing interoceptive PE in another fashion. That is, emotions arise via external interoceptive active inference: by sampling and modifying the external environment in order to change an already formed interoceptive percept. That is, emotions are specific strategies for regulating affective valence. More precisely, I will defend the view that a certain emotion E amounts to a specific strategy for minimizing interoceptive PE by way of a specific set of stored knowledge of the counterfactual relations that obtain between actions and its prospective interoceptive, sensory consequences. An emotion arises when such knowledge is applied in order to regulate valence.

Given its simplicity and enormous unifying and explanatory power, the predictive mind approach to mental architecture (predictive processing) is becoming an increasingly attractive way of carrying out theoretical and experimental research in cognitive science. According to this view, the mind is constantly attempting to minimize the discrepancy between its expectations (or sensory predictions) and its actual incoming sensory signals. In the interoceptive inference view of emotion (IIE), the principles of the predictive mind have been extended to account for emotion. IIE holds that, in direct analogy to visual perception, emotions arise from interoceptive predictions of the causes of current interoceptive afferents. In this paper, I argue that this view is problematic, as there are arguably no regularities pertaining to emotion in the physiological inner milieu, from which the relevant interoceptive expectations could be learned. Therefore, it is unlikely that our expectations relative to emotion involve interoceptive expectations in the way required by IIE. The latter view should then be amended. In this respect, I suggest that emotions might arise via external interoceptive active inference: by sampling and modifying the external environment in order to change a valenced feeling. Thus, if the predictive mind approach is on track, emotions are not to be understood in direct analogy to perception (e.g., vision). Rather, I suggest that the view of emotion that emerges from the predictive mind is in line with motivational approaches to emotion. In the suggested view, (almost) just as drives (or ‘homeostatic motivations’), emotions are suited for the active regulation of the inner milieu by sampling the environment in order to finesse our emotion expectations. In this view, emotions are individuated, and differ from drives, in virtue of the distinctive sampling policies (‘actions’) characteristic of the high levels of the predictive hierarchy.

Over the last several years, predictive processing approaches to computational neuropsychiatry have been gaining explanatory traction. According to these accounts, some of the positive symptoms of schizophrenia arise from aberrant precision-weighting during hierarchical Bayesian inference. In contrast to computational approaches, the phenomenological tradition in psychiatry holds that disruptions or alterations of the self (Ichstörungen) lie at the core of schizophrenia. In this article, we aim to integrate these approaches. We align ourselves with the phenomenological insight that self-disturbances lie at the core of schizophrenia and with the hierarchical conception of the self-model that emerges from the predictive processing architecture. We suggest that disruptions of the “hard core” of the narrative self-model might be partially involved in the generation of aberrant experiences and hyperreflexivity, and in some aspects of the sense of self-alienation and ambiguity that is characteristic of the phenomenology of schizophrenia.

Divided-mind approaches to the conflict involved in self-control are pervasive. According to an influential version of the divided-mind approach, self-control conflict is a dispute between affective reactions and “cold” cognitive processes. I argue that divided-mind approaches are based on problematic bipartite architectural assumptions. Thus views that understand self-control as “control _of_ the self” might be better suited to account for self-control. I subsequently aim to expand on this kind of view. I suggest that self-control conflict involves a rivalry between narrative self-models aimed at reducing error, analogous to model rivalry in binocular rivalry paradigms. This approach straightforwardly accounts for the sense of conflict that is characteristic of self-control within a unified-mind approach, and among its other explanatory advantages, it directly aligns with current views that account for addiction in terms of maladaptive self-representational processes.

Philosophical discussion tends to converge on the view that narratives are at the center of the emotion of grief. In this article, I expand on this kind of view. On the one hand, I argue that key strands of phenomenological and neuroscientific studies suggest that grief consists in a complex emotional process of disconfirmation-and-updating of the narrative self-model. By heuristically drawing on an analogy between binocular rivalry and grief, I show that certain salient aspects of the phenomenology of grief, such as self-alienation and ambiguity, are straightforwardly reflected by this account. On the other hand, I argue that this hierarchical approach has the resources to: (i) show that both narratable and unnarratable experiences of personal loss are both instances of grief; and (ii) differentiate between narratable and unnarratable experiences of grief, without compromising the view that self-constituting narratives are at the center of the phenomenon.

The reductionist/anti-reductionist debate about testimonial justification (and knowledge) can be taken to collapse into a controversy about two kinds of underlying monitoring mechanism. The nature and structure of this mechanism remains an enigma in the debate. We suggest that the underlying monitoring mechanism amounts to emotion-based stereotyping. Our main argument in favor of the stereotype hypothesis about testimonial monitoring is that the underlying psychological mechanism responsible for testimonial monitoring has several conditions to satisfy. Each of these conditions is satisfied by our “hot” stereotypical capacities. Intergroup emotions play a key role here. Intergroup emotions inform the agent about which candidate stereotype is better suited to the current situation. Emotions serve as evidence that makes a certain stereotype and its particular profile of features more or less expected.

Valence is a key construct in the affective sciences and in the philosophy of emotion. Carruthers (2011, 2017) has recently offered an account of the nature of valence. He defends a (representational) version of what might be called the non-sensory signal theory of valence (NSS). According to the latter, valence is identified with inner signals—which are not themselves perceptual nor conceptual states of any sort—which mark sensory representations as good or bad. In this paper, I argue that Carruthers’s version of NSS is problematic on its own, independently of the plausibility of competing theories of valence. Carruthers’s arguments to the effect that valence is non-sensory fail to rule out the hypothesis that, together with arousal, valence might also be grounded in bodily, sensory representations. Carruthers’s claim that valence is not a sensory item in the furniture of the mind needs to be then more thoroughly substantiated. Keywords: affect, valence, arousal, interoception.

The affective scaffolding framework underlies differing perspectives on how griefbots affect the grieving process. While some researchers are optimistic, others draw more cautious conclusions. We endorse the view that griefbots are affective scaffolds. However, we draw a pessimistic conclusion about human-griefbot interaction. There are two main views on successful grief: the “Freudian view” and the continuing bonds view. The “Freudian view” paves the way to the pessimistic conclusion. In this paper, we propose a free-energy approach of the “Freudian view”. Predictive processing is often regarded as providing a process theory for the free-energy principle. In this framework, model evidence must be maximised by updating and optimising models. Griefbots are not recommendable since they are scaffolds that obstruct and lengthen the maximisation of model evidence, making models more rigid and poorly adaptable to changing dynamics. Building on this approach, we examine the ethical dimensions of griefbot’s use and design. We argue that there is something inherently morally wrong in the very conception of griefbots. Their functionality predisposes them to cause harm by disrupting the grief process.