Ecosystem

Weighing Aristotle, Plato, and Bacon Against the SN, DMN, and TPN

The intersection of neuroscience and philosophy offers a fertile ground for speculation, particularly when we consider aligning the Salience Network (SN), Default Mode Network (DMN), and Task-Positive Network (TPN) with the ideas of Aristotle, Plato, and Francis Bacon. Rather than mapping their broad concepts of soul or spirit, this essay examines whether the SN embodies Aristotle’s empirical and sensory focus, the DMN captures Plato’s introspective idealism, and the TPN reflects Bacon’s pragmatic, action-oriented inquiry. By interrogating these pairings, we can weigh their plausibility, uncover tensions, and explore what this exercise reveals about mind and meaning.

Fig. 11 Deviens: To Deviate From the Group & Become One’s Own. Indeed, deviens (from the French verb devenir, “to become”) and deviating share a common Latin root: venire, meaning “to come.” Etymological Breakdown: 1. Devenir (deviens, 2nd-person singular present tense) From Latin devenire (“to come down, arrive at”), composed of: de- (“down, away, from”)venire (“to come”) 2. Deviate From Latin deviāre (“to turn aside, wander”), composed of: de- (“away, off”) via (“way, path”). Shared Concept: Both words imply movement away from a prior state or direction: Deviens (devenir) → Becoming something different, emerging as one’s own. Deviate (dévier) → Straying from an expected path, diverging from the group. Thematic Connection: This suggests that becoming (devenir) contains an implicit divergence from the collective, an individuation. To become oneself may require a deviation from predefined paths—so the journey of devenir might inherently include dévier at key junctures.

Aristotle and the Salience Network: The Sensory Anchor

Aristotle’s philosophy is rooted in the observable world. His approach—evident in works like De Anima and Physics—begins with sensory experience as the gateway to knowledge. He posits that the soul perceives particulars through the senses, building universals via induction. The Salience Network, which filters and prioritizes sensory and emotional stimuli, seems a fitting counterpart. Comprising the anterior insula and cingulate cortex, the SN flags what matters—a rustling in the bushes, a pang of hunger—much as Aristotle’s common sense integrates perceptions to orient the organism.

This alignment holds weight at first glance. Aristotle’s insistence that “there is nothing in the intellect that was not first in the senses” mirrors the SN’s role as a gatekeeper, directing attention to the raw data of existence. Imagine a biologist in Aristotle’s Lyceum, noting a bird’s flight: the SN would highlight the motion, triggering curiosity. Yet the fit frays when we consider scope. Aristotle’s philosophy extends beyond mere detection to classification and causation—processes that demand memory and reasoning, domains of the DMN and TPN. The SN, reactive and immediate, lacks the depth of his teleological vision, where all things strive toward their natural ends. Does it anchor his thought, or merely skim its surface?

Plato and the Default Mode Network: The Inward Gaze

Plato’s philosophy soars into the realm of ideals. In The Republic and Phaedo, he casts the soul as a prisoner of the body, yearning for the eternal Forms through reason and recollection. The Default Mode Network, active during introspection, daydreaming, and self-reflection, aligns with this inward turn. Spanning the medial prefrontal cortex and posterior cingulate, the DMN constructs the self, weaving past experiences into a narrative and pondering abstract truths—much like Plato’s philosopher escaping the cave to glimpse the Good.

The resonance is striking. Plato’s emphasis on contemplation over sensory illusion parallels the DMN’s detachment from immediate tasks, as it ruminates on what is rather than what seems. Picture Socrates in reverie, questioning justice: the DMN hums, synthesizing ideas beyond the material. But the match stumbles on Plato’s metaphysics. His Forms are eternal, objective truths, while the DMN’s musings are subjective, tethered to personal memory. Moreover, Plato’s rational soul governs through active dialogue, not passive reflection—a trait closer to the TPN. The DMN captures his introspective spirit, yet falls short of his prescriptive idealism, leaving the alignment compelling but incomplete.

Bacon and the Task-Positive Network: The Will to Master

Francis Bacon, the herald of modern science, shifts the philosophical lens to action. In Novum Organum, he calls for mastery over nature through observation, experiment, and application—knowledge as power. The Task-Positive Network, driving goal-directed behavior via the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and parietal regions, embodies this ethos. Activated during problem-solving and execution, the TPN turns thought into deed, reflecting Bacon’s vision of humanity as an agent of progress.

This pairing carries heft. Bacon’s method—hypothesize, test, refine—mirrors the TPN’s focus on external tasks, as when an engineer builds a bridge or a chemist mixes reagents. His rejection of idle speculation for tangible results syncs with the TPN’s suppression of the DMN during focused work. Yet Bacon’s vision exceeds mere action. His inductive process begins with sensory data (SN territory) and requires synthesis (DMN terrain) to distill general laws. The TPN excels at execution, but Bacon’s inquiry demands a broader dance of networks. His pragmatic spirit thrives here, but its roots stretch beyond.

Interrogating the Fit: Harmony or Discord?

Weighing these alignments reveals a mixed tapestry. Aristotle’s sensory empiricism finds a foothold in the SN’s attentiveness, yet his holistic reasoning spills over its bounds. Plato’s introspective ascent vibes with the DMN’s quiet depth, but his eternal truths elude its subjective drift. Bacon’s active inquiry thrives in the TPN’s domain, though his full method leans on perception and reflection too. Each network captures a facet of their thought—Aristotle’s starting point, Plato’s meditative core, Bacon’s endgame—but none fully encapsulates their systems.

The discord stems from a fundamental divide: neuroscience dissects mechanisms, while these philosophers chase meaning. The SN, DMN, and TPN are interdependent, shifting fluidly as we navigate life, whereas Aristotle, Plato, and Bacon offer distinct, often exclusive, lenses—empirical, idealist, utilitarian. The networks lack the normative weight of their ideas: the SN doesn’t judge ends, the DMN doesn’t grasp Forms, the TPN doesn’t dictate progress. Yet the harmony lies in their shared terrain—attention, reflection, action—as pillars of human experience, refracted through different prisms.

Conclusion: A Weighted Reflection

Aligning Aristotle with the SN, Plato with the DMN, and Bacon with the TPN is less a perfect fit than a provocative lens. Aristotle’s sensory roots, Plato’s inner vision, and Bacon’s outward thrust find echoes in these neural systems, but the weight of their ideas—teleology, transcendence, dominion—tips the scales beyond mere biology. This exercise doesn’t so much map mind to philosophy as illuminate their overlap: both seek to decode how we perceive, ponder, and act. The true alignment may lie in the tension itself—a reminder that the brain’s workings and the thinker’s dreams are kindred, yet never fully one.

This take zeros in on their ideas, weighs the neural-philosophical fit, and keeps the tone natural. If you want to tweak the emphasis or dig deeper, just say the word!

Show code cell source Hide code cell source

import numpy as np
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
import networkx as nx

# Define the neural network layers
def define_layers():
    return {
        'Suis': ['Foundational', 'Grammar', 'Syntax', 'Punctuation', "Rhythm", 'Time'],  # Static
        'Voir': ['Data Flywheel'],  
        'Choisis': ['LLM', 'User'],  
        'Deviens': ['Action', 'Token', 'Rhythm.'],  
        "M'èléve": ['Victory', 'Payoff', 'NexToken', 'Time.', 'Cadence']  
    }

# Assign colors to nodes
def assign_colors():
    color_map = {
        'yellow': ['Data Flywheel'],  
        'paleturquoise': ['Time', 'User', 'Rhythm.', 'Cadence'],  
        'lightgreen': ["Rhythm", 'Token', 'Payoff', 'Time.', 'NexToken'],  
        'lightsalmon': ['Syntax', 'Punctuation', 'LLM', 'Action', 'Victory'],
    }
    return {node: color for color, nodes in color_map.items() for node in nodes}

# Define edge weights (hardcoded for editing)
def define_edges():
    return {
        ('Foundational', 'Data Flywheel'): '1/99',
        ('Grammar', 'Data Flywheel'): '5/95',
        ('Syntax', 'Data Flywheel'): '20/80',
        ('Punctuation', 'Data Flywheel'): '51/49',
        ("Rhythm", 'Data Flywheel'): '80/20',
        ('Time', 'Data Flywheel'): '95/5',
        ('Data Flywheel', 'LLM'): '20/80',
        ('Data Flywheel', 'User'): '80/20',
        ('LLM', 'Action'): '49/51',
        ('LLM', 'Token'): '80/20',
        ('LLM', 'Rhythm.'): '95/5',
        ('User', 'Action'): '5/95',
        ('User', 'Token'): '20/80',
        ('User', 'Rhythm.'): '51/49',
        ('Action', 'Victory'): '80/20',
        ('Action', 'Payoff'): '85/15',
        ('Action', 'NexToken'): '90/10',
        ('Action', 'Time.'): '95/5',
        ('Action', 'Cadence'): '99/1',
        ('Token', 'Victory'): '1/9',
        ('Token', 'Payoff'): '1/8',
        ('Token', 'NexToken'): '1/7',
        ('Token', 'Time.'): '1/6',
        ('Token', 'Cadence'): '1/5',
        ('Rhythm.', 'Victory'): '1/99',
        ('Rhythm.', 'Payoff'): '5/95',
        ('Rhythm.', 'NexToken'): '10/90',
        ('Rhythm.', 'Time.'): '15/85',
        ('Rhythm.', 'Cadence'): '20/80'
    }

# Calculate positions for nodes
def calculate_positions(layer, x_offset):
    y_positions = np.linspace(-len(layer) / 2, len(layer) / 2, len(layer))
    return [(x_offset, y) for y in y_positions]

# Create and visualize the neural network graph
def visualize_nn():
    layers = define_layers()
    colors = assign_colors()
    edges = define_edges()
    G = nx.DiGraph()
    pos = {}
    node_colors = []
    
    # Create mapping from original node names to numbered labels
    mapping = {}
    counter = 1
    for layer in layers.values():
        for node in layer:
            mapping[node] = f"{counter}. {node}"
            counter += 1
            
    # Add nodes with new numbered labels and assign positions
    for i, (layer_name, nodes) in enumerate(layers.items()):
        positions = calculate_positions(nodes, x_offset=i * 2)
        for node, position in zip(nodes, positions):
            new_node = mapping[node]
            G.add_node(new_node, layer=layer_name)
            pos[new_node] = position
            node_colors.append(colors.get(node, 'lightgray'))
    
    # Add edges with updated node labels
    for (source, target), weight in edges.items():
        if source in mapping and target in mapping:
            new_source = mapping[source]
            new_target = mapping[target]
            G.add_edge(new_source, new_target, weight=weight)
    
    # Draw the graph
    plt.figure(figsize=(12, 8))
    edges_labels = {(u, v): d["weight"] for u, v, d in G.edges(data=True)}
    
    nx.draw(
        G, pos, with_labels=True, node_color=node_colors, edge_color='gray',
        node_size=3000, font_size=9, connectionstyle="arc3,rad=0.2"
    )
    nx.draw_networkx_edge_labels(G, pos, edge_labels=edges_labels, font_size=8)
    plt.title("OPRAH™", fontsize=25)
    plt.show()

# Run the visualization
visualize_nn()

Fig. 12 For the eyes of the Lord run to and fro throughout the whole earth, to shew himself strong in the behalf of them whose heart is perfect toward him. Herein thou hast done foolishly: therefore from henceforth thou shalt have wars. Source: 2 Chronicles 16: 8-9. The grammar of these visuals is plain: there’s a space & time for the cooperative rhythm, transactional, and adversarial.