3 ms·

Most of the time we are on autopilot and our brain retconns the reason for an action, decision, or emotion after the fact. But it seems clear that at times we

Most of the time we are on autopilot and our brain retconns the reason for an action, decision, or emotion after the fact. But it seems clear that at times we consciously steer our autopilot in a new direction by choice. Some number of repetitions and that becomes the new autopilot behavior. Actual conscious thought and control is too metabolically expensive and slow to use much of the time but it has its uses.

ithkuil 2y ago
From what I read it's actually the opposite. Studies seem to show that while our attention makes us feel in charge and at the helm, the decisions and the thoughts that arise happen way before our ability to influence them consciously. It appears that our consciousness is mostly a rationalization layer after the fact. That's why there is a problem explaining consciousness in the first place. The more we dig the more elusive it is
- tsimionescu 2y ago
  As far as I know, those studies all look at minor "decisions", such as pressing the left or the right button after a sound is heard. They find that they can predict which button will be pressed earlier than the conscious decision to pick one was experienced. However, there is no actual "decision" to be made there. It's a random choice, and it's not that random choices are not conscious decisions. It's much harder to devise an experiment that looks at actual, meaningful, decisions. And I'm not talking about something extreme like "do I love this person" or whatever, just a real decision, like the ones you might make in an RPG ("do I help or kill this NPC").
- ithkuil 2y ago
  I'm puzzled by the downvotes. Am I saying something obscene or against the rules of polite discourse? I mean, I could be wrong sure but I don't think downvotes are for disagreeing with what somebody says but for punishing behavior that lowers the standards of the forum. Am I really doing that with this comment? Do I need to cite all the articles and books I read to form this opinion or else I cannot state an opinion?
anon-3988 2y ago
> Actual conscious thought and control is too metabolically expensive and slow to use much of the time but it has its uses. I was about to write some long winded reply to why this doesn't make sense . Is this such a crazy thought? Do people really feel like they are in control of themselves? After spending a lot of time thinking about this, I cannot understand how I make decisions. I literally cannot tell you what I am going to do next. I can say that I am going to end this reply. But I have no idea when or why I am going to stop here.
- mewpmewp2 2y ago
  Same, and this is why I think I'm also not much more than an LLM or a next token predictor. All of my actions could be continuous domino pieces. It all seems just to be falling naturally. I'm not trying to be humble or anything. It just seems obvious how the life is. All I do could be autopiloted, I do have an unexplained special sense of consciousness, but I'm not actually seeing a strong need for it. I happen to be or feel like I am and that I'm somehow special, but it seems like I could also operate at the same or even better efficiency without that.
armitron 2y ago
It's absurd to believe that consciousness is in any way responsible for decision making. There's no plausible scientific model that would allow for that to take place without breaking causality. Instead, we have strong evidence that points to consciousness being an epiphenomenon of brain activity, completely detached from action.
- kbrkbr 2y ago
  What about this conclusion then: It's absurd to believe quantum physics can in any way be the right theory of the world at a small scale. Why? > There's no plausible scientific model that would allow for that to take place without breaking causality. Indefinite causal structures show up quantum theory [1]. All hinges on what is meant by the opaque "breaking causality". [1] e.g. https://www.nature.com/articles/nphys2930 https://www.nature.com/articles/nphys2930
- achillesheels 2y ago
  What a dangerous thought, so mathematical learning is predetermined what biological factors? Is not the conservation of the body’s metabolism in the utility of communication served more physically? The ability to fast and ascetic rituals are self-evident demonstration of human motor neural control away from baseline biological processes. Unless you can please explain a hypothesis for the development of motor control habits, e.g. for healthy socializing? I suppose better group balance by controlling the body’s autonomic nerves is an adaptive response, but who is the one to get the chain of being started? To the conscious activity the answer is: through random genetic assortment?
- cwillu 2y ago
  At the very least, consciousness causes enough impact on reality to result in the concept of “consciousness” to make it into dictionaries. If it was truly an epiphenomenon, such real-world impacts would be acausal.

ithkuil 2y ago

From what I read it's actually the opposite. Studies seem to show that while our attention makes us feel in charge and at the helm, the decisions and the thoughts that arise happen way before our ability to influence them consciously. It appears that our consciousness is mostly a rationalization layer after the fact. That's why there is a problem explaining consciousness in the first place. The more we dig the more elusive it is

tsimionescu 2y ago
As far as I know, those studies all look at minor "decisions", such as pressing the left or the right button after a sound is heard. They find that they can predict which button will be pressed earlier than the conscious decision to pick one was experienced. However, there is no actual "decision" to be made there. It's a random choice, and it's not that random choices are not conscious decisions. It's much harder to devise an experiment that looks at actual, meaningful, decisions. And I'm not talking about something extreme like "do I love this person" or whatever, just a real decision, like the ones you might make in an RPG ("do I help or kill this NPC").
ithkuil 2y ago
I'm puzzled by the downvotes. Am I saying something obscene or against the rules of polite discourse? I mean, I could be wrong sure but I don't think downvotes are for disagreeing with what somebody says but for punishing behavior that lowers the standards of the forum. Am I really doing that with this comment? Do I need to cite all the articles and books I read to form this opinion or else I cannot state an opinion?

anon-3988 2y ago

> Actual conscious thought and control is too metabolically expensive and slow to use much of the time but it has its uses. I was about to write some long winded reply to why this doesn't make sense . Is this such a crazy thought? Do people really feel like they are in control of themselves? After spending a lot of time thinking about this, I cannot understand how I make decisions. I literally cannot tell you what I am going to do next. I can say that I am going to end this reply. But I have no idea when or why I am going to stop here.

mewpmewp2 2y ago
Same, and this is why I think I'm also not much more than an LLM or a next token predictor. All of my actions could be continuous domino pieces. It all seems just to be falling naturally. I'm not trying to be humble or anything. It just seems obvious how the life is. All I do could be autopiloted, I do have an unexplained special sense of consciousness, but I'm not actually seeing a strong need for it. I happen to be or feel like I am and that I'm somehow special, but it seems like I could also operate at the same or even better efficiency without that.

armitron 2y ago

It's absurd to believe that consciousness is in any way responsible for decision making. There's no plausible scientific model that would allow for that to take place without breaking causality. Instead, we have strong evidence that points to consciousness being an epiphenomenon of brain activity, completely detached from action.

kbrkbr 2y ago
What about this conclusion then: It's absurd to believe quantum physics can in any way be the right theory of the world at a small scale. Why? > There's no plausible scientific model that would allow for that to take place without breaking causality. Indefinite causal structures show up quantum theory [1]. All hinges on what is meant by the opaque "breaking causality". [1] e.g. https://www.nature.com/articles/nphys2930 https://www.nature.com/articles/nphys2930
achillesheels 2y ago
What a dangerous thought, so mathematical learning is predetermined what biological factors? Is not the conservation of the body’s metabolism in the utility of communication served more physically? The ability to fast and ascetic rituals are self-evident demonstration of human motor neural control away from baseline biological processes. Unless you can please explain a hypothesis for the development of motor control habits, e.g. for healthy socializing? I suppose better group balance by controlling the body’s autonomic nerves is an adaptive response, but who is the one to get the chain of being started? To the conscious activity the answer is: through random genetic assortment?
cwillu 2y ago
At the very least, consciousness causes enough impact on reality to result in the concept of “consciousness” to make it into dictionaries. If it was truly an epiphenomenon, such real-world impacts would be acausal.