Philosophy

I have complicated thoughts about all that. Firstly, I don’t think in this culture we’re in any danger of having people divorce people’s actions from their results. Like your argument has the form of a slippery slope argument, but from where I’m sitting that slope is uphill. I also don’t think we’re in any danger of people not feeling satisfaction in their accomplishments. Again, I think we more often face the opposite problem of convincing people that if they succeed it wasn’t entirely their doing.

Secondly, I don’t agree that praise from others or even a sense of self-satisfaction are things we should be looking to as lodestones. But I have to draw a distinction here between feeling satisfied with one’s work and a more ego-centred self-satisfaction. You’re a programmer, so you know what I mean if I talk about the satisfaction of a really well-designed, well-written piece of code, and the pleasant flow state achieved while creating it. That’s satisfaction with oneself, in a way, but its not your ego being on full blast because you just won a poker tournament or something. Those sort of highs are nice once in a while, but not sustainable. If you look at organisations like AA, or religions, or other community groups which work to pull people out of the sorts of tough life spots you’re talking about, “use willpower and determination and grind it out” is the opposite of the advice. People are advised to downplay their egos, become part of a community, surrender control and help others.

The other thing is that the flipside of praise is blame. If people deserve praise for pulling themselves out of tough spots, they deserve blame for not doing it, however much we like to pretend otherwise. And while it’s dubious that praise and ego-stroking from others helps much in getting people to improve themselves, it’s pretty obvious that blaming and shaming is a huge hindrance to those who haven’t managed to get things together yet.

1 Like

AA to me is a perfect example of using the enormous power of social bonds to overcome something that the individual has finally accepted they don’t have the power to overcome on their own. For that to work, yeah, you have to surrender your ego to the group. It’s the same dynamic that works with frats, the military, etc. It can work for good or evil.

But I guess I’m talking more about personal triumph, which does happen. I was a weekend warrior crackhead. I’ve been to the edge and stood and looked down, to quote Van Halen. The next step is becoming a weekday crackhead. Then you lose your job, house and car in fairly short order. I had to make a decision to pull back, which felt like the hardest thing I’d ever done in my life.

Now, I’ve always acknowledged that I think I have an impulsive but not addictive personality, and I had the privilege to have a safety net and not live in a neighborhood where crack was easy as walking a few houses down the block. But it still was damn hard. I see no reason to not be proud of myself for walking away from the edge, while not shaming others who may have been in a much rougher situation.

It’s not just addictive type stuff. Walking up the steps to SF City College to take my first programming classes in my late 20s was way scarier than it should have been. Changing your life is terrifying sometimes. Putting all my shit in the back of a pickup and driving to California was scary as hell. So was driving to Panama. A lot of people never do anything like that in their lives.

So I’m proud of those things in the same way that I described someone being proud of pulling out of the morass in the previous post. My point is I don’t think all scary life decisions are the kind where you have to strip away the ego and not be proud of yourself. Being proud of past successes helps breed more future successes. And yes shame can work the same way in reverse when it becomes debilitating. But a little shame isn’t always a bad thing.

If I think about how I was pre-ordained to do all the things I’ve accomplished, that takes the fun out it for me, even though I know it’s true on the cosmic scale. It’s not true on the inside-my-head scale. This to me makes the concept of free will vs. not free will a semantic distinction that I don’t see having much real world application.

I finally bough Chalmer’s The Conscious Mind yesterday, and it’s really been blowing my hair back. It seems like it could be the book that I wished Consciousness Explained would be, although I don’t think I had the background to understand it 20 years ago. Not that that everything is crystal clear for me right now: he uses a lot of technical terms, but the biggest headscratcher so far was hotchpotch.

Anyway, I feel like this is the first book to give the vocabulary to talk clearly about questions that I’ve had for a long time and shortcomings that I’ve found in other sources. For example, he distinguishes between the psychological mind, which in principal doesn’t present any challenges to materialism, and the phenomenal (or experiencial) mind, which has always mystified me.

2 Likes

Yoga guy just posted this, which apparently really really speaks to third way bros. The youtube comments are just like “OMG this is so true!”. Not one real discussion because there is no real discussion to be had. The whole thing is platitudes and then the cartoonist is completely morphing the message into covid-related BS.

You can’t fix chicken pox without introducing another bug apparently. All the kid needed was vitamins. SO BRILLIANT!

Hitler supposedly wanted to make the world a better place. Yeah, so did abolitionists, to which all of these virtue-signalling arguments could just as easily apply.

I tried searching for just the transcript. But apparently Watts, like Jordan Peterson, must only be watched on video. It’s not about the words or meaning, it’s about how it makes you feel. Or something.

People are just fucking stupid and can’t think critically, that’s all there is to it.

At least the derpers are pretty much being straightforward in their belief that everyone is as big of an asshole as them and is just faking it. The third-way bros wrap their BS in all this mystical mumbo jumbo that doesn’t even mean anything, but vaguely puts down those annoying liberals who keep complaining about stuff like racism, and the end of our democracy. So annoying. Fix yourselves first liberals. Stop putting chemicals in your bodies. Take some vitamins!

https://alanwatts.org/1-5-1-mind-over-mind-pt-1/
https://alanwatts.org/1-5-2-mind-over-mind-pt-2/

Ok this looks like something of a transcript.

The same problem arises in medicine, because the body is a very complexly interrelated organism. And if you look at the body in a superficial way you may see there’s something wrong with it, here’s chicken pox. And the spots that it should come all out all over the place well you might say well spots of that cut them off. So you kill the bug. But then you find you’ve got real problems. Because you have to introduce some bugs to kill the bug, it’s like bringing rabbits into Australia. And that starts going all over the place and getting out of hand. And then you think well now wait a minute, it wasn’t the bugs in the blood there are bugs all over the place. What was wrong with this person that his blood system suddenly became vulnerable to those particular bugs his resistance was in doubt? Therefore what you should have given was not an antibiotic but vitamins. OK so we’re going to build up his resistance but resistance to what. You may build up resistance to this and this and this class of bugs, but then there’s another one that loves that situation it comes right in. See we always look at the human being medically, in bits and pieces, because we have heart specialists, lung specialists, bones specialists, nerve specialists, and so on. And they each see the human being from their point of view there are a few generalists but they realise that human bodies. Complicated that no one mind can understand it. And furthermore, supposing we do succeed in healing all these people of that diseases. What do we then do about the population problem. I mean we’ve stopped cholera, the black bubonic plague, we’re getting the better of tuberculosis, we may fix cancer and heart disease.

So brilliant! So beautiful. This speaks to my soul.

Then what will people die of? Well they’ll just go on living. On the enormous quantities of others. Then we have to fix this birthing. Pills for everybody. Then we find one of the effects the side effects of those pills. What are the psychological effects upon men and women of not breeding of children in the usual way? We don’t know. And what seems a good thing today or yesterday like D.D.T. turns out tomorrow to been a disaster. What seemed in the moral and spiritual sphere, to like great virtues in times past are easily seen today as hideous evils, let’s take for example the Inquisition, in its own day among Catholics the Holy Inquisition was regarded. As we’d today regard the practice of psychiatry. You, you see, you feel that in curing the person of cancer almost anything is justified. The most complex operations, the most weird surgery people suspended for days and days on end on the end of tubes with X. ray penetration burning.

Like just wtf.

Our opponents, whether in China or Russia or Vietnam, have the same feeling of righteousness about what they’re doing as we have on our side. And a plague on both houses because, as Confucius said “the goody good is of the thieves of virtue.” Which is the form of our own problem the road to hell is paved with good intentions. So in a way the moral, or the immoral, of these considerations is that if you are really aware of your own inner workings, you will realize there’s nothing you can do to improve yourself. Because you don’t know what better is, in any case, and you, who will do the improving, are the one who needs to be improved. And this also goes for society. We can change society, we can get enormous enthusiasm going out of the idea that there is a revolution afoot, and that this revolution is going to set everything to right. Do you know a revolution that ever said anything to right? Whether the revolution came from the left wing or from the right wing.

Never try to make anything better. Just do your breathing exercises and take vitamins. That is the highest true virtue.

1 Like

That YouTube the cartoon gives a good idea of how they’ve repackaged him as an anti-science third-way soothsayer.

I was at a party talking to a young college student majoring in philosophy and she was wondering about what science would be like without ethics.

I mentioned stuff like Tuskegee for her to research. How would you have talked to her?

I did point out that her idea of ethicsless science seemed more like science with a purely utilitarian outlook.

Just imagine business without ethics.

Jk, I’d have to know the specifics but it doesn’t strike me as a coherently formulated topic.

Science without ethics would just be, like, measuring things and recording facts randomly. As soon as you make any judgments about what’s worth studying or why not to stick a dude’s testicles in the electric socket to record the results you’re already doing ethics.

Trying to do science without doing ethics is about as dumb as trying to do ethics without doing science.

1 Like

Philosophers can be pretty funny

By the law of the excluded middle, either ‘A is B’ or ‘A is not B’ bust be true. Hence either ‘the present King of France is bald’ or ‘the present King of France is not bald’ must be true. Yet if we enumerated the things that are bald, and then the things that are not bald, we should not find the present King of France in either list. Hegelians, who love a synthesis, will probably conclude that he wears a wig.

-Bertrand Russell

1 Like

“It is not contrary to reason to prefer the destruction of the whole world to the scratching of my little finger.”

David Hume

I’ve been doing some philosophizing lately, and I’ve become very convinced that the following view is true:

Your brain is a purely physical system. It gets lots of stimuli from the outside world and it has muscles it can twitch to do stuff. How does it decide which muscles to twitch when as a function of the outside stimuli? Economists will tell you that the brain has a reward function and it builds a world model and selects the sequence of muscle twitches that has the highest expected utility. This is completely false. The problem of deciding which muscle twitches lead to which utility is much, much too hard to solve. Instead, your brain just hallucinates an answer. In particular, it imagines what would happen (I originally said “simulates” here, but that implies a bit too much determinism) if there was a homunculus living inside your skull that got all your sensory inputs as mysterious atomic qualia. Your brain imagines that the homunculus finds some of these qualia pleasurable and some aversive. The homunculus can have feelings and goals too. Having imagined this scene, your brain asks itself WWHD?: “What Would the Homunculus Do?”. Whatever the homunculus decides, the brain implements via muscle twitches and updates the hallucination.

This is the entire explanation to the hard problem. You are the homunculus. You don’t really exist, your brain made you up. The fact that your conscious experience doesn’t really make sense if you think about it is a crack in the simulation. The simulation is not designed to be perfectly seamless, it’s designed to make reasonable decisions for your brain to implement. Your brain simplifies and abstracts the real sense data to make the simulation more tractable. A trivial example is that your brain fills in the blind spot in your retinas with hallucinated qualia so the homunculus doesn’t get distracted by the mysterious patches of empty void floating around in its peripheral vision.

Again, I want to emphasize that this story perfectly explains everything you observe about the external world. There are no hard problems in the world you see around you. This story does not explain anything about the world the homunculus lives in. The homunculus’s world operates by different rules, which aren’t constrained to be entirely consistent or logical (and in fact are not). There is no logical explanation for how the homunculus’s world works, because it doesn’t exist and is logically impossible.

This is kind of a pessimistic view, and in a totally joking but also maybe serious? way, I worry that if I really convince myself of it I’ll go insane. BUT, I think the implications for free will actually have some nice vibes. The universe is deterministic with random elements, which means that all actions you will ever take were either set in stone at the moment of the Big Bang or are attributable to some random, meaningless quantum fluctuations that happened in the interim. The vibes are looking pretty grim so far. The good news, though, is that you don’t actually exist in this grim, meaningless reality. You don’t really exist at all! Your brain summoned you up out of the void of nothingness like a necromancer summoning a spirit from the astral planes. What’s more, having been summoned like this, “you” have real causal agency. If the “you” that your brain summoned is a malevolent demon, you’ll do a bunch of bad shit and hurt people, because you are evil. If your brain summoned a kind nature spirit, you’ll bless the crops or something because you are benevolent. Determinism constrains the particular properties of the homunculus is summoned up to live in your body, but once summoned, the brain gives your homunculus unconstrained agency to act as it chooses.

Again, this is not entirely satisfying because a strong concept of free will is incoherent. Everything is either caused by something else (deterministic) or not (random). There’s no third kind of cause that can be free will. However, if your entire existence is imaginary, then you can just imagine that there is! Less glibly, the entire idea of “you” exists at a different level of abstraction than the material universe. Free will is a concept that exists at that level of abstraction, not in the material universe of quarks and atoms.

I’ve become so convinced by this train of thinking that, even though I know people will strenuously disagree with me, it’s very hard to predict what you’re all going to say in a way that doesn’t seem totally ridiculous.

2 Likes

Skimmed for now and will read later, but my thought is that one’s consciousness is much more an observer and narrator than director.

My only knowledge of Buddhism comes from learning a little about meditation + pop culture but believe this is largely what it is about. To put it in simpler terms, your “ego” or “self” doesn’t really exist so just chill. Taken too far, you might zone out and walk into traffic so don’t do that (but it’s not really a big deal if you do).

Cite?

As far as driving yourself crazy, most of the people in the world have legitimately crazier views about reality and they do fine (by not really thinking about it).

I didn’t read closely but some of your claims are at least reminiscent of Andy Clark’s Surfing Uncertainty and predictive processing in general. It’s at least a popular minority position.

Simulation theory is to philosophy of mind what Ayn Rand is to political philosophy, a diversion to occupy the witless. It’s like answering origin of life questions with “RNA flew in on a meteor.” Well, how’d the RNA get on the meteor?

I also didn’t read closely. I don’t strongly disagree bc I don’t know enough philosophy or facts about how the brain/body works and interacts with the world. Maybe I should bc I listen to/read a bit of this stuff but I might be slightly allergic and don’t take it too seriously. Anyway, part of what you seem to be describing but not naming is emergence.

If, by Simulation theory, you’re talking about like The Matrix, that’s not what bobman is getting at.

Well, I apologize. I have a small seizure every time I read “simulation theory” and go catatonic for the next 60 seconds.

1 Like

I haven’t really given the post a full read yet, but I believe he’s talking about how you (your awareness/consciousness) experience a model of reality and not reality directly - which I think is pretty obvious - well, not ‘reality’ maybe because it’s all real, but the world outside of your brain or something.

1 Like