u/Advanced-Reindeer894

inspired by this post from Quora, not sure how informed the answers are: https://www.quora.com/What-if-we-looked-at-the-self-as-a-model-that-our-brain-creates-Would-people-still-claim-that-is-an-ignorant-way-to-live-when-in-fact-it-is-part-of-our-nature-to-live-as-a-self

one says we are nothing more but just a stream of biological data, another talked about how it’s functional and useful to have, overall though the answers feel like they are leaving things out more than answering them.

mostly asking because I’ve been doing it for some time and have noticed that I have dreams that turn out to be accurate predictors of what happens later in my life, but only in my life. I may or may not even know how it all ends.

is this for real or am I just mistaken

I know the title is vague but it’s more a personal question since talking about consciousness isn’t really something I understand much and I’m also wondering how much this impacts our lives, or at least mine.

like this post in a previous thread: https://www.reddit.com/r/consciousness/comments/1uz7dti/comment/oy6loxn/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=mweb3x&utm_name=mweb3xcss&utm_term=2&utm_content=share_button

does this mean I’m supposed to be doing something different after learning about Dennetts theory? what about the idea of proprioception? does that mean my body doesn’t exist? if we extend that to theories about selfhood then what? If the self does not exist then when I feel attracted to someone is that wrong?

I just don’t know what to make of what folks say and more than that whether it ought to change my life or whether I should change mine. and if they do then how? I just…don’t really understand how it fits together or what it all means.

free will question brought on by this post: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/JLZnSnJptzmPtSRTc/intuitive-self-models-8-rooting-out-free-will-intuitions

mostly referring to the first three posts about hunger being some hormone, your wants and desires being a lucky brain circuit, or everything we do just being an algorithm.

how is life to be meaningful if we’re just robots in the end?

Specifically inspired by this article and the first three things he lists: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/JLZnSnJptzmPtSRTc/intuitive-self-models-8-rooting-out-free-will-intuitions

according to the author, everything we value and want is either the result of some brain algorithm operating on physics and chemistry or just how the circuits are wired?

if that’s true then what does that mean for our lives? if nothing we do is by “choice” then do our feelings, desires, etc even matter if all it would take is just tweaking the hardware to change it?

Mostly inspired by this post: https://www.reddit.com/answers/df51a811-bf86-4142-af69-d87f2bb379b0/?q=How+does+culture+shape+our+consciousness%3F&source=PDP&tl=en

The short version being that consciousness is impacted by culture and so is our perception.

If that’s true then what is the next move? what would it mean for human life and living? If I fall in love is that feeling real or just brainwashing from the culture? do I really love my dogs? do I really enjoy anything I like to do or is that just the culture brainwashing? is it even brainwashing? etc etc

Whats the right move to make in life? just doing nothing? feel nothing?

The short version is after reading and watching stuff by David Eagleman, I’m not sure what to think about reality, let alone how to function.

The predictive brain, vision only using 5% of input, love just being a chemical and nothing else, seeing things with your brain instead of “over there”, and much more. I’m not sure how to process any of it.

Even more so is his advice about seeking novelty and challenging yourself with new perspectives while at the same time invalidating that point with his research. what novelty is there to seek or what is there to learn if according to him our experience is all illusory?

https://www.reddit.com/r/neuro/comments/1n8eek1/comment/ncgaor5/?force-legacy-sct=1

Inspired by the above thread on here but it’s more of a general question.

When I learn about neuroscience, often the scientists don’t really explain what it means for our lives and IMO being able to do that is pretty important. Especially when I often see people saying neuroscience undermines much of what we think to be true.

Like if our emotions are predictions then does that mean they can’t be trusted and we‘re lying to ourselves? what about predicted reality, does that make our senses liars? if our intuitions about life aren't sufficient then what are we to do? what about emotional reactions seeming to be dependent on our ability to categorize experience? there seems to be a lot of data but nothing to really tie it together, or explain what it means.

the researchers I’ve read either don’t know or they contradict each other on what it means. It seems kind important to understand what this means for our lives especially in the case of law. The notion of agency and blame is a big factor in how our society operates.

Most of this is derived from neuroscientists like Anil Seth, David Eagleman, and others. A lot of it comes from this link: https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-03633-1_11

But I guess my main point is that...does the advancement of neuroscience harm humanity as a whole? A lot of it seems to blow holes in the things we value like friendship, love, community, reality, and more.

David Eagleman I know says:

>He explains that our brains are locked in the dark vault of the skull and only interact with electrical signals. Therefore, our perception of color, sound, and shape is a “controlled hallucination” the brain constructs to help us navigate. In the outside world, these things don’t inherently exist; they are simply the brain’s internal interpretation of data like electromagnetic radiation and air pressure waves.

And yet he is married with two kids while at the same time suggesting our selves and reality aren't "real". I'm not really sure how he does what he does while believing such things.

Ani Seth mentions reality is some controlled hallucination mediated by the senses. That instead of actually sensing reality we are constructing it and that construction is mediated by senses. Everything from the book you read, the cup of tea, the movie you watch. Even pain seems to be a construct of the brain.

So knowing all that...how are we to live? Is the solution to just rot in bed for life because none of our experience of reality and what we value is "real"? Do humans exist if our perception is that flawed? If the self is the result of cognitive effort from the brain then what does that mean for human society and life?

It just seems like discoveries are being made but there is no way to integrate them into human life. If anything they seem like they'd be to the detriment of it.

I'm...scared at the stuff I read when it comes to AI and consciousness because I wonder what it means for humans and our lives and how we treat or interact with each other.

Beyond all the breakdowns of what intelligence and consciousness means I wonder what our lives and culture would look like if AI were to advance to a point where it is either fully conscious or self-motivated.

Or rather in the process of making AI that is such, would we break down everything in our lives that renders life worth living? Using terms like self-referential modeling, or adaptation, or breaking down the magic of being a human into computational terms to make an AI like us, feels like it would erode what makes us human and what gives meaning to our lives. Would there be any difference between us and AI at that point? Would we starting treating humans as something to be programmed at that point?

For an example of what I mean I got this post from another thread: https://www.reddit.com/r/Artificial2Sentience/comments/1ul24m4/why_do_we_expect_every_form_of_intelligence_to/

>Maybe for most but not that recently. We have abandoned anthropocentric conceptions of intelligence slowly from like in 1910s with theories like Biosemiotics (and then whole field of Cybernetics), which is also applied nowadays as framework for artificial entities and has a lot of writings that could seem relevant because it also highlights a lot of pitfalls in seeing intelligence where there is none.

>I recommend starting with The Discovery of the Artificial. Behavior, Mind and Machines Before and Beyond Cybernetics by Roberto Cordeschi, A Foray into the Worlds of Animals and Humans: With A Theory of Meaning by Jakob Johann von Uexküll and Design for a Brain by Ashby

Sorry if this sounds vague it's just something that gives me anxiety and prevents me from sleeping at night, wondering if in the process of making something like us we end up losing ourselves along the way. I worry that as explanations for things like love, relationships, happiness, things like that, getting reduced to tech terms would just rob life of it's meaning and value. Could we keep living once we hit such a point? Would I lose everything that ever mattered to me?

Or am I just blowing this out of proportion? Am I too doomer about what this stuff could mean? I guess I'm just terrified because I don't understand this stuff or what it could mean, especially in terms of humanity's future.

I usually skip whatever noise they offer in the store but damn did they get me good this time. Literally one of my favorite artists/group and the intro them on the main menu is so fire!!!!

Damn you blizzard, I caved this time and spent money....