4 ms·

Why would the brain evolve to do this? it has no evolutionary purpose. Once you are dying it doesn't matter what the brain does or feel, it can make you feel bl

Why would the brain evolve to do this? it has no evolutionary purpose. Once you are dying it doesn't matter what the brain does or feel, it can make you feel bliss or the most unimaginable torture, nothing will help you reproduce more or be more adapted to the environment, you are done.

oneoff786 4y ago
The brain is a system. That it does weird stuff when flooded with whatever chemicals might be associated with imminent fear of death isn’t that surprising at all. Not everything happens is a result of evolutionary guidance. Many things are just side effects.
tetris11 4y ago
If you take the position of life being a simulation, it could just be that every entity upon termination, simply summarises key aspects of their life to be forwarded, collated, and further summarised by a higher entity, in order to test some model.
Narretz 4y ago
It might just be an artefact of dying or catastrophic emergency that has nothing to do with evolutionary pressure.
XorNot 4y ago
The comment (currently) above this one is a pretty good explanation (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31059618 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31059618): if there's anything in your memories which will help you escape the imminent death situation, then you might survive. Not doing it is a losing strategy since you're not taking any additional steps to prevent termination of the geneline.
- aortega 4y ago
  Indeed, it might be useless in a complex life like a human but it might very well save a fish or a rat from being eaten.
throwanem 4y ago
There is no such thing as "evolutionary purpose." Evolution is a stochastic side effect of lossy self-replication. There's no one involved to do any intending. Traits that don't impact fitness are selected neither for nor against. And there's no distinction you can draw between traits that arise by happenstance and those for any other reason, because there never is any other reason. So why be surprised that such a (presumably) durable epiphenomenon of human neural complexity, having once arisen by happenstance, should persist? There is quite literally no reason for it not to.
- Flankk 4y ago
  The probability of a neutral gene becoming fixed is extremely low. It requires a mutation to take a random walk from zero to gene pool saturation. Most neutral traits disappear due to genetic drift, not due to selection pressure. That said, there is no evidence that this is fixed/durable.
  - DubiousPusher 4y ago
    I don't think this is a correct model. Because gene mutations and second hand effects aren't truly random. For example, prior mutations which confer some benefit and which are therefore selected for can make certain later neutral mutations more likely.
    - Flankk 4y ago
      It is the correct model. You can learn more about it here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIftg3cM4BM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIftg3cM4BM
      - DubiousPusher 4y ago
        You misunderstood me. I didn't mean to say that you had proposed the wrong model for neutral evolution. Rather that direct selective pressure and neutral evolution were not the only possible explanations for how a certain gene sequence might become widespread and therefore your model was incomplete as regards the spread of genes. Again, there are genetic mutations which make certain other mutations more likely. A beneficial mutation which spreads widely can eventually cause a plurality to carry a gene that is neutral or even harmful by giving it a ride on its own selective pressure. Furthermore, complex systems are susceptible to emergent behavior. For example, is our brain selected by nature to undergo altered consciousnesses in the presence of some chemical substances? Probably. Should we then believe that nature has "selected" our brains to be altered by every psycho-actice drug that exists? Probably not. Some of these are certainly "happy" accidents by which the chemical function of our brain also happens to be impacted or interfered with by some other chemicals, thus inducing a "high".
ahmedfromtunis 4y ago
Maybe this is too late for evolution to have any say. The "memories" that flash before one's eyes might just be a byproduct of how the brain is built ― imagine if it had to just dump all the electric charge that was saving all that data. Whatever it is, however, there's no way the evolutionary mechanisms are going to have any impact. Why? Because memories or no memories, the person is just dying and will not be able to pass this characteristic to their offspring. I remember reading somewhere that our health degrades as we get old because the factors that cause this degradation occur too late in the human's lifetime, so that no matter if they get them or not, they probably have already passed them (or not) to their children. Also, maybe this comment[0] can offer a hypothesis on why this is may *be* important evolutionary-wise: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31059618 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31059618.
csomar 4y ago
I'd guess this has to do with the brain being electrified. Who the hell knows what the patient has experienced. This is all speculation on the researchers part. It makes for a nice story, however. (see the cultures angle).
DocG 4y ago
Well maybe so when you don't die, you are not having pstd of the near death experience and can continue living normally? Maybe it's nothing to do with dying but more to be mentally stable if you don't die?
dotancohen 4y ago
> Why would the brain evolve to do this? it has no evolutionary purpose. Not necessarily. As another commenter speculates, this mechanism may help one remember a similar situation and thus find a solution to prevent death. The person can then go on to father another generation of people with this trait.
asdff 4y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_hitchhiking https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_hitchhiking

oneoff786 4y ago

The brain is a system. That it does weird stuff when flooded with whatever chemicals might be associated with imminent fear of death isn’t that surprising at all. Not everything happens is a result of evolutionary guidance. Many things are just side effects.

tetris11 4y ago

If you take the position of life being a simulation, it could just be that every entity upon termination, simply summarises key aspects of their life to be forwarded, collated, and further summarised by a higher entity, in order to test some model.

Narretz 4y ago

It might just be an artefact of dying or catastrophic emergency that has nothing to do with evolutionary pressure.

XorNot 4y ago

The comment (currently) above this one is a pretty good explanation (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31059618 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31059618): if there's anything in your memories which will help you escape the imminent death situation, then you might survive. Not doing it is a losing strategy since you're not taking any additional steps to prevent termination of the geneline.

aortega 4y ago
Indeed, it might be useless in a complex life like a human but it might very well save a fish or a rat from being eaten.

throwanem 4y ago

There is no such thing as "evolutionary purpose." Evolution is a stochastic side effect of lossy self-replication. There's no one involved to do any intending. Traits that don't impact fitness are selected neither for nor against. And there's no distinction you can draw between traits that arise by happenstance and those for any other reason, because there never is any other reason. So why be surprised that such a (presumably) durable epiphenomenon of human neural complexity, having once arisen by happenstance, should persist? There is quite literally no reason for it not to.

Flankk 4y ago
The probability of a neutral gene becoming fixed is extremely low. It requires a mutation to take a random walk from zero to gene pool saturation. Most neutral traits disappear due to genetic drift, not due to selection pressure. That said, there is no evidence that this is fixed/durable.
- DubiousPusher 4y ago
  I don't think this is a correct model. Because gene mutations and second hand effects aren't truly random. For example, prior mutations which confer some benefit and which are therefore selected for can make certain later neutral mutations more likely.
  - Flankk 4y ago
    It is the correct model. You can learn more about it here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIftg3cM4BM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIftg3cM4BM
    - DubiousPusher 4y ago
      You misunderstood me. I didn't mean to say that you had proposed the wrong model for neutral evolution. Rather that direct selective pressure and neutral evolution were not the only possible explanations for how a certain gene sequence might become widespread and therefore your model was incomplete as regards the spread of genes. Again, there are genetic mutations which make certain other mutations more likely. A beneficial mutation which spreads widely can eventually cause a plurality to carry a gene that is neutral or even harmful by giving it a ride on its own selective pressure. Furthermore, complex systems are susceptible to emergent behavior. For example, is our brain selected by nature to undergo altered consciousnesses in the presence of some chemical substances? Probably. Should we then believe that nature has "selected" our brains to be altered by every psycho-actice drug that exists? Probably not. Some of these are certainly "happy" accidents by which the chemical function of our brain also happens to be impacted or interfered with by some other chemicals, thus inducing a "high".

ahmedfromtunis 4y ago

Maybe this is too late for evolution to have any say. The "memories" that flash before one's eyes might just be a byproduct of how the brain is built ― imagine if it had to just dump all the electric charge that was saving all that data. Whatever it is, however, there's no way the evolutionary mechanisms are going to have any impact. Why? Because memories or no memories, the person is just dying and will not be able to pass this characteristic to their offspring. I remember reading somewhere that our health degrades as we get old because the factors that cause this degradation occur too late in the human's lifetime, so that no matter if they get them or not, they probably have already passed them (or not) to their children. Also, maybe this comment[0] can offer a hypothesis on why this is may *be* important evolutionary-wise: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31059618 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31059618.

csomar 4y ago

I'd guess this has to do with the brain being electrified. Who the hell knows what the patient has experienced. This is all speculation on the researchers part. It makes for a nice story, however. (see the cultures angle).

DocG 4y ago

Well maybe so when you don't die, you are not having pstd of the near death experience and can continue living normally? Maybe it's nothing to do with dying but more to be mentally stable if you don't die?

dotancohen 4y ago

> Why would the brain evolve to do this? it has no evolutionary purpose. Not necessarily. As another commenter speculates, this mechanism may help one remember a similar situation and thus find a solution to prevent death. The person can then go on to father another generation of people with this trait.

asdff 4y ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_hitchhiking https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_hitchhiking