[boxed]

I think you might be confused about the expression "world model". In this context it clearly means that a person has an understanding of reality based on "math->physics->chemistry->biology->psychology" instead of "peer pressure->group identity" or whatever you see in QAnon or cults or whatever.

If a person primarily evaluates the truth content of a statement based on identity or something instead of math/physics/etc then that person has no "world model", and vice versa.

[_Algernon_]

That's not what world model means, neither in psychology or artificial intelligence — two fields Scott writes a lot about so he should know how the term is used or define how he uses it if he uses a non-typical definition.

[mallowdram]

No it's neurobiological, psychology and particularly cog-sci is in error, as both place language ahead of concepts. Our understanding of reality per language is post hoc, it's an illusion. Life is always ad hoc, any violation of a narrative model is easily evaded for survival. This is simple stuff folks!

[boxed]

You like to use big words. But you're not making any sense. Notice this.

[morpheos137]

The irony is intense. Classic psychotic dysphasia.

[Mallowram]

It only makes sense to scientific thinkers who think in correlation, and know how degraded words and sentences are. Anyone who accepts word statements as valid is at loss. The only role of language is to refute itself.