5 ms·

The Grand Illusion

11 points by diodorus 8y ago

davidgrenier 8y ago
Can someone educate me on why the article is written like this? Does the type of discourse have a name? Is there specific target audience, like philosophers for instance? Is it this particular author or should I expect the same of most content on that site?
- salawat 8y ago
  This seems to be a summary or "plug" of Dennet's philosophy. Usually this type is a poor attempt at trying to reproduce the author's subjective understandimg of another's philoskphy, which is kind of moot. I'd recommend reading Dennett's work strongly over this one. The point of philosophical reading is to share the "way one thinks" not what one is thinking about. For instance, the closest we get to an elucidation of how Dennett thinks in this piece is that we learn that Dennett accepts that a large component of first-person consciousness is an illusion (I.e. the sense experience being "differrnt" to what is measurably the case), and that he rejects a dualistic desperation of mind being distinct from the world it is observing. I can't speak to this American flag illusion, but look at the bent pencil in water example. If we weren't taught about refraction and just took our senses for gospel, we would posit that water bends things placed in it when viewed from outside the water. We would be under the influence of an illusion (our internal representation of what is going on not aligning with the measurable reality around us) in our consciousness. In that way, Dennett can safely say that the phenomena of consciousness ITSELF is an illusion based on the principle that the map != the landscape (the map being our consciousness, the landscape being the world). The map resembles the landscape as closely as possible to help in navigating, but the map is, and will never be a perfect representation of what is going on around us. As an exercise to demonstrate what I mean, find a small rock, and place it somewhere on the ground outside while keeled down. Walk away from where you left it for a few minutes and think about other things. Then go back to where you put it and try to find the rock you placed from a distance. Likely, if you don't cheat and hyperlearn the location by expending extra effort to remember the exact spot, you'll end up having a hard time picking out the exact spot you left it. You'll know where it is within say, 2 feet, but you won't "see it". This is the map phenomena. Our consciousness is a small slice of what is going on around us, and it is constantly warping and revising based on what we are thinking about and trying to do. By Dennett's reasoning, consciousness MUST be an illusion. That doesn't mean you should DISMISS it, by any means. Just be aware that what you consciously experience is not the sum total of everything that is there. It's just the stuff most important to what you are trying to do at that moment. To make things even more confusing, "what you are trying to do at that moment" is by definition MORE than what you are consciously aware of trying to do at that moment! You are PART of the world, so your conscious awareness of your thoughts is just your innate ability to sample your own mental state! Welcome to Philosophy. Taking your world view, and expanding it whether you like it or not. Aspirin is on the shelf, here's a blanket to hide under in case of existential crisis. It is useful if for no other reason than it teaches one how easy it is for something that looks "simple" to someone else to get utterly destroyed in translation when being communicated to someone else. Both parties to the communication need to "line up their illusions" for stuff to make sense.
steve_g 8y ago
I guess I need to read Dennett's book. He's clearly a smart guy, but the the idea that consciousness is an illusion seems self-refuting. "I assert not-I" "Observations show that observations are not real" How does that work?
- posterboy 8y ago
  Illusion [ɪˈluː.ʒən] (countable) Anything that seems to be something that it is not. Arguably, conscious thinks it in control but it is not. > "I assert not-I" I is a feeling, and subconcious fact, nothing to think about like that except highly abstractly, metaphysically. > observations > how does that work It doesn't, which is why we can't stop thinking about.
- tempodox 8y ago
  I can't see how having anyone tell me I'm just an illusion would do me any good for any of the decisions I have to make (after all, the person telling me would be even more of an illusion). On this particular question, I decide to not invest any time or energy in such pointless sophistry.
lwhalen 8y ago
What is the 'American flag illusion' the author is so keen on harping about? 30 seconds on DDG didn't help me out.
- rwbhn 8y ago
  https://www.stevespanglerscience.com/lab/experiments/american-flag-optical-illusion/ https://www.stevespanglerscience.com/lab/experiments/america...

11 points by diodorus 8y ago

Can someone educate me on why the article is written like this? Does the type of discourse have a name? Is there specific target audience, like philosophers for instance? Is it this particular author or should I expect the same of most content on that site?

salawat 8y ago
This seems to be a summary or "plug" of Dennet's philosophy. Usually this type is a poor attempt at trying to reproduce the author's subjective understandimg of another's philoskphy, which is kind of moot. I'd recommend reading Dennett's work strongly over this one. The point of philosophical reading is to share the "way one thinks" not what one is thinking about. For instance, the closest we get to an elucidation of how Dennett thinks in this piece is that we learn that Dennett accepts that a large component of first-person consciousness is an illusion (I.e. the sense experience being "differrnt" to what is measurably the case), and that he rejects a dualistic desperation of mind being distinct from the world it is observing. I can't speak to this American flag illusion, but look at the bent pencil in water example. If we weren't taught about refraction and just took our senses for gospel, we would posit that water bends things placed in it when viewed from outside the water. We would be under the influence of an illusion (our internal representation of what is going on not aligning with the measurable reality around us) in our consciousness. In that way, Dennett can safely say that the phenomena of consciousness ITSELF is an illusion based on the principle that the map != the landscape (the map being our consciousness, the landscape being the world). The map resembles the landscape as closely as possible to help in navigating, but the map is, and will never be a perfect representation of what is going on around us. As an exercise to demonstrate what I mean, find a small rock, and place it somewhere on the ground outside while keeled down. Walk away from where you left it for a few minutes and think about other things. Then go back to where you put it and try to find the rock you placed from a distance. Likely, if you don't cheat and hyperlearn the location by expending extra effort to remember the exact spot, you'll end up having a hard time picking out the exact spot you left it. You'll know where it is within say, 2 feet, but you won't "see it". This is the map phenomena. Our consciousness is a small slice of what is going on around us, and it is constantly warping and revising based on what we are thinking about and trying to do. By Dennett's reasoning, consciousness MUST be an illusion. That doesn't mean you should DISMISS it, by any means. Just be aware that what you consciously experience is not the sum total of everything that is there. It's just the stuff most important to what you are trying to do at that moment. To make things even more confusing, "what you are trying to do at that moment" is by definition MORE than what you are consciously aware of trying to do at that moment! You are PART of the world, so your conscious awareness of your thoughts is just your innate ability to sample your own mental state! Welcome to Philosophy. Taking your world view, and expanding it whether you like it or not. Aspirin is on the shelf, here's a blanket to hide under in case of existential crisis. It is useful if for no other reason than it teaches one how easy it is for something that looks "simple" to someone else to get utterly destroyed in translation when being communicated to someone else. Both parties to the communication need to "line up their illusions" for stuff to make sense.

steve_g 8y ago

I guess I need to read Dennett's book. He's clearly a smart guy, but the the idea that consciousness is an illusion seems self-refuting. "I assert not-I" "Observations show that observations are not real" How does that work?

posterboy 8y ago
Illusion [ɪˈluː.ʒən] (countable) Anything that seems to be something that it is not. Arguably, conscious thinks it in control but it is not. > "I assert not-I" I is a feeling, and subconcious fact, nothing to think about like that except highly abstractly, metaphysically. > observations > how does that work It doesn't, which is why we can't stop thinking about.
tempodox 8y ago
I can't see how having anyone tell me I'm just an illusion would do me any good for any of the decisions I have to make (after all, the person telling me would be even more of an illusion). On this particular question, I decide to not invest any time or energy in such pointless sophistry.

lwhalen 8y ago

What is the 'American flag illusion' the author is so keen on harping about? 30 seconds on DDG didn't help me out.

rwbhn 8y ago
https://www.stevespanglerscience.com/lab/experiments/american-flag-optical-illusion/ https://www.stevespanglerscience.com/lab/experiments/america...