Do we see reality as it is? | Donald Hoffman
Trki, Kody, Cheaty do
Cognitive scientist Donald Hoffman is trying to answer a big question: Do we experience the world as it really is ... or as we need it to be? In this ever so slightly mind-blowing talk, he ponders how our minds construct reality for us. TEDTalks is a daily video podcast of the best talks and performances from the TED Conference, where the world's leading thinkers and doers give the talk of their lives in 18 minutes (or less). Look for talks on Technology, Entertainment and Design -- plus science, business, global issues, the arts and much more. Find closed captions and translated subtitles in many languages at http://www.ted.com/talks/donald_hoffman_do_we_see_reality_as_it_is Follow TED news on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/tednews Like TED on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TED Subscribe to our channel: http://www.youtube.com/user/TEDtalksDirector
Komentarze
-
And so survival belongs to those who can, not most accurately sense reality, instead construct an easily reactable perception of reality. If you are able to reconstruct reality as a place where you can get by simply by snapping your fingers to survive then you've outmatched every other life form we know of.
-
если у меня плохое зрение, это значит, что я неправильно воспринимаю реальность, и вовсе не в глазах проблема ? и что же тогда мешает мне воспринимать реальность ? и какую реальность мне помогают воспринимать очки
-
so stop lying
-
galileo nor copernicus...discoverd the roundness of the earth...it was way before them in the muslim world that muslim scientists already proofed what has been mentioned in their holy book the quran...that the earth is round
-
Hello Daniel Dennett...still think you came through on Dawkin's Ark?
-
Our brains are vastly different from computers. If we designed a computer that has the storage capacity of the human brain, it would require about 10 Tera watts. The human brain only uses about 10 watts. Think on that. lol
-
simulation theory is becoming more mainstream.
-
Conclusion: we all live in Matrix. Mission of our "real" life to make offsprings. Who for and why?
-
if your not in the moment sensing just air, or deep into math, i don't think you have a sense of reality as it is.
-
As far as I know we don't have core memory passed down. We don't know fire is hot or a danger before we experience it. We may have a mind that builds patterns from information available. But to change reality we would have to be built with a internal model of reality. And if something is found to be safe then wouldn't reality change after we experience it.
-
WELCOME to The Matrix. You’ve lived here all your life.
-
we've known this for centuries...............
-
In this video he discusses mathematical models of evolution that show a survival disadvantage in accurate perception of reality, yes the real world example of the male jewel beetles mating with beer cans shows the exact opposite. This example alone indicates his mathematical models might be lacking.
There is fitness value to accurate perception of reality, but such mutations to enable it have to arise and the energy costs of maintaining such perception can easily exceed any benefits it could accrue. That is what's really happening.
We could have eyes that see microwaves through x-rays and have ten different color cones and ears with the frequency range of bats but how much energy would that take and where we get it? Brains are already energy hogs consuming 20-25% of glucose despite being about 6% of body mass.
However, this doesn't even seem to be Hoffman's real issue. He seems to think after Kant that perception is merely the phenomena which represent an unknowable underlying noumena. That issue doesn't seem to be any more settled today than when Kant proposed it over two hundred years ago. Turing to biology won't solve it, since better sense organs will only give us more accurate perceptions of the phenomena leaving the noumena as inscrutable as ever. -
A Diatribe of nonsense, researching nothing produces nothing, Speculation is Speculation, FACT. By a Neuroscience degree holder.
-
While it is pretty obvious that we human beings do not see all of reality considering how wrong we were about things in the past (thinking the Earth was flat, then still thinking it was at the center of the universe when got evidence it was round, that diseases such like cholera, chlamydia, and the Black Death were caused by noxious, “bad air”, that fire was an element called “phlogiston”, etc..) I have to wonder if any of the evolved entities in those experiments ever got close to developing science. Besides, it seems it would be easy to skew the data on such experiments by choosing the parameters of what these artificial worlds were and what it meant to see "reality" in them.
-
Science has always been a slave to philosophy. Mind-body dualism, guys.
-
Since reality can only be perceived through senses (or with the help of instruments) what difference does it make if what we perceive is really real or not? It's real enough for the perceiver. Suppose we can somehow get the idea that "real reality" is different. But how are we going to perceive it unless we use the same good old senses and instruments? What we will face is the same interface - that's all. But that interface is not presented to us by reality. It comes with our body. Our physical body - the ultimate limiting factor - just doesn't work in any other way. You can't get a Motorola C121 do the same things as an iPhone 6.
It seems to me that to solve the problem (if there is one at all!) we need to upgrade both the hardware and the software. Which is probably what happens when one experiences enlightenment and gets reborn as a higher being - a god perhaps? -
This guy's monotone style made it SEEM like this took 4 hours but in reality, it was only 21 minutes.
-
Did he just say, "perception is not about seeing truth, but about having kids?" New meaning to, ""But love is blind, and lovers cannot see / The pretty follies that themselves commit..."
This is great!
Nicely put