Your Brain Doesn't Command Your Body. It Predicts It. [Max Bennett]
TL;DR
Max Bennett synthesizes evolutionary neuroscience and AI to argue that the brain operates as a predictive generative model rather than a passive sensory processor, where the neocortex enables 'learning by imagining' through mental simulations orchestrated in partnership with older brain structures.
🧠 Perception as Active Inference 3 insights
Brain generates perception from priors, not raw sensory input
Following Hermann von Helmholtz, conscious perception is an active inference about what is likely true in the world, where sensory data serves only as evidence to update prior beliefs rather than directly constructing reality.
Maintaining models despite sensory gaps
The brain sustains its mental model of objects even when sensory input disappears, updating only when contradictory evidence forces a revision, which enables efficient navigation through noisy or dark environments.
Unity of perception prevents simultaneous alternatives
The brain cannot render two simulations at once, explaining bistable illusions like the duck/rabbit where it constructs one coherent 3D hypothesis at a time because no hybrid model exists.
🎭 Neocortex and Mental Simulation 3 insights
Neocortex enables learning by imagining
The neocortex enables model-based reinforcement learning by building rich world models that can be explored offline through mental simulation without requiring immediate sensory input.
Partnership with subcortical structures
Mental simulation requires collaboration between the neocortex and older structures like the thalamus and basal ganglia, which handle the pausing, intention modeling, and search space pruning necessary for planning.
Integration with Hawkins' thousand brains theory
The neocortex contains redundant overlapping models that must be synergized into a single rendered simulation, aligning with the constraint that we perceive only one coherent interpretation at a time.
🔬 Bridging AI and Evolutionary Gaps 3 insights
Data scarcity in comparative psychology
Our understanding of brain evolution relies on sparse data, such as the complete absence of navigation studies in lamprey fish, forcing scientists to infer ancestral capabilities from distant relatives like teleost fish.
The AI-neuroscience implementation gap
While Carl Friston's active inference provides rich explanatory frameworks for biological intelligence, its principles remain largely unimplemented in practical AI systems like transformers, suggesting either a divergence between artificial and biological intelligence or untapped breakthroughs.
Outsider synthesis across fields
Bennett's technology background provided a cognitive bias toward 'ordered modifications' that enabled productive cross-pollination between comparative psychology, evolutionary neuroscience, and AI engineering.
Bottom Line
Treat intelligence as predictive simulation rather than stimulus-response processing: whether designing AI or interpreting behavior, recognize that perception is active hypothesis testing where the brain generates reality from priors and uses mental simulation to navigate future possibilities.
More from Machine Learning Street Talk
View all
He won a Nobel here for AlphaFold. Then he left. - John Jumper
Nobel laureate John Jumper explains how AlphaFold solved the 50-year protein structure prediction problem by collapsing years of experimental work into minutes, while emphasizing its narrow scope as a starting point for biological research rather than a universal model of life.
The Ex-Congressman Who Says AI Isn't Unstoppable — Brad Carson
Former Congressman and Pentagon official Brad Carson argues that AI development is not inevitable and can be controlled through strategic regulation, particularly by treating AI as products subject to liability laws rather than granting them human rights, while leveraging chip controls and mandatory testing to shape the technology's future.
Inference, not prediction — Prof. Michael I. Jordan on what modern AI is still missing
Professor Michael I. Jordan critiques the hype around AGI and prediction-based LLMs, arguing that modern AI lacks economic and social thinking; he advocates for 'inference' systems grounded in game theory and market dynamics that respect human agency and create collective value.
Inference, not prediction — Prof. Michael I. Jordan on what modern AI is still missing
Professor Michael I. Jordan critiques AGI as harmful PR that demoralizes young engineers, arguing that true intelligence requires economic and social systems thinking—treating billions of humans as agents in value-creating ecosystems—rather than isolated prediction engines built without intellectual foundations.