Here is the text of the NPR article about biologist Donald Hoffman, with his TED talk at the bottom.
Re-read the short text if you need a refresher, then watch the 20-minute discussion. Afterward, post your thoughts on the relative truth and importance of this theory, as well as any questions it raises. Bonus points if you can make explicit the connections to Kant inherent in Hoffman's ideas.
11 Comments
Izzy Halloran
12/13/2016 08:52:00 pm
It is frightening to consider that humans may be perceiving reality the wrong way. Hoffman brings up an interesting point when he discusses the red tomato. If I look and see a red tomato one meter away, and then close my eyes and see gray, is the tomato still there? This example reminds me of the proverbial saying, if a tree falls in a forrest, and there is no one around to hear it, does it make a sound? One could say yes of course because we have seen other trees fall and we know they produce noise. But one could also argue that just because we have seen a tree fall and make a sound doesn't mean we can conclude that it will definitely make a sound if we are not there to watch it fall and hear it(skepticism). Hoffman goes on to involve Galileo, who brings up the idea that the qualities of an object(its taste, odor, texture) are observed when we experience them. But, if the human was not there to experience these qualities, they would not exist. I am not sure if I believe this, but it is certainly an interesting concept to think about. Can we find the objective answer? How? Additionally, I do believe that the theories and ideas of Kant are crucial for Hoffman's argument. Both Kant and Hoffman's arguments depend on data. Kant's argument of the Phenomenal Realm, the mind establishing its categories on the data of experience. Hoffman's theory depends on scientific data. Kant and Hoffman both formulated radical theorems to give them the answers of the questions they asked. Kant asked about formulations and universal principles. Hoffman on the other hand, asked if we were seeing the correct reality.
Reply
Parizaad Mohammadi
12/14/2016 01:39:46 pm
It's very scary, yet possible thought that no one sees things the way they really are. It's been shown that there's no way of knowing if everyone sees colors the same way as everyone else. I believe Kant's theory is very important for understanding this. And realizing that the world is only as YOU see it. This raises questions such is, are there somethings that we all see the same way?
Reply
Kelly Farley
12/14/2016 02:22:56 pm
Hoffman's theory is interesting and some would say it oculd definitely be a possibility. His theory is basically questioning whether we see reality as it is and he believes we are constructing a reality based on our senses. Hoffman starts by disproving our reality by discussing how we perceived the world to be flat and thought our earth was the unmoving center of the universe, all based on senses. We later discovered both of these ideas to be false, thus proving that are senses are not completely reliable. The way our senses see reality (although Hoffman would say this is not true reality) has given survival an advantage. He says the way we are designed to see reality is in order to keep us safe, but we do not have to take this literally. He used the desktop as an example of literal and perceived reality. The difficult part about this theory is the inability, or at least difficulty, in proving it because it. I cannot say I completely agree because it is a crazy idea, but then again I cannot say I completely disagree with it because it could definitely be a possibility. Kant believes there is an external, material world, and that its existence cannot be doubted. This idea is seen in Hoffman's theory because he believes there is a parallel universe of some sorts that is utter reality and not just a construction of what we see based on our five senses. He feels very strongly about this, however it is not necessarily another world, it is the same one we are in right now but just seen differently.
Reply
Kiera Lee
12/14/2016 08:07:45 pm
It is definitely a frightening thought to question the validity of the world as we know and see it. As mentioned in other comments, the saying "If a tree falls in the woods and no one is around to hear it, does it still make a sound?" rings in my mind. The only thing I find unconvincing about this is that if my reality is not the "true" reality, but just how I see it, how do so many other people see it so similarly? Obviously not everyone has the exact same perception of the world and one's surroundings, we all generally agree on the same things in our every day life that exist and happen.People around our age all entered a place we call school every day, we all eat lunch in the same vicinities, we all go home at the bell. If I were only living in my own reality, how to so many other people follow the same patterns? Is it scientific, as Hoffman suggests? Where Kant also believes there is a different between our perceived world and the external world, he believes this evidence is found through experience and observation. Hoffman's theory suggests that it is the same world, but seen differently by everyone and proven by scientific data. Both arguments are convincing in themselves, but don't have me fully convinced as to where I believe I stand in the realm of reality based on their views.
Reply
Max Portman
12/15/2016 02:47:09 pm
This concept is fascinating to me. The idea that our world as we perceive it is possibly not at all even there at all is overwhelming to dwell on. To me, the question both Kant and Hoffman ask is what philosophy is all about: is what we know real and how do we know if it is? To me, it would not be surprising to find that the answer to these questions are inconceivable to the human brain and that is simply why we have not answered it. However, if that is the case than how or what did come about that the human brain can only capacitate to the extent it is allowed to. What is really stopping us from learning what we cannot comprehend besides spontaneous combustion?
Reply
Giulia Dostie
12/15/2016 06:17:53 pm
I feel ad though Hoffman brings up interesting questions about our reality or what we think is our reality. It is a very scary thing to think about and for myself, it is hard to wrap my brain around this subject. How could something that we think is there because our senses tell us that, yet it actually is not? If we can't trust our senses to allow us to perceive some type of truth, than what can we believe? I feel as though Kant wasn't even this radical with his thoughts; Hoffman is a modern day EXTREME Kant. Kant believed that we do know we live in a universe, it's just that we all perceive it differently. Hoffman is telling us that, yes we do perceive a world, it's just not the actual world we live in; it's a world that guards us from the true reality. This to me is really confusing because of the way I have been thinking, and yes I agree with Kant that there most definitely is a world yet we all perceive it differently, but Hoffman makes you really think about your existence. Even though I feel as though Hoffman’s ideas are a little to radical for my taste, he definitely brings some unanswered questions to the table, and maybe the reason I don't fully like Hoffman’s idea is because I'm scared of the results it will bring if he is right.
Reply
tara e
12/20/2016 11:59:30 am
the way the guy kept wording things was really confusing to me but basically i think he's saying that we do not perceive things as they really are and that our brains create reality. maybe i misunderstood the whole thing he was saying but that's what i got out of it. I think it seems like a more crazy thought than it really is that we create our own realities. Obviously because we are all constructed differently we are gonna see things differently, both literally and figuratively. i think when you start analyzing reality and sense experience youre kind of just chasing your tail because not matter how many tests scientists do they cannot conclude that one specific event or happening or perspective is the true reality, and thats pretty freaky man.
Reply
Tyhler Harty
12/29/2016 10:03:10 pm
Hoffman's theory is very interesting on how organisms actually perceive things that may be around them. In addition to this theory is that it shows some importance. The reason is because it goes against what human perception is perceived to be since our own reality could be fabricated by evolution. This relates to Kant because the world can be perceived very differently by many different things.
Reply
Sofia Fernandes
1/2/2017 10:16:24 am
This theory is important because it ensures that we shouldn't believe everything we experience with our senses. If we were to put all of our trust in our perceptions of reality, then we may never truly understand that our perceptions are not necessarily the reality of reality. But if what we see and our brain's way of making us see things in the way we do are just "tricks, hacks, and icons", then will we ever know what the true reality is? Is it possible to discover what the single accurate version of reality is, and is there any living thing on the Earth that sees the truth? Hoffman's ideas connect nicely to Kant's. Both men see that our brains perceive the objective world in a subjective way by filtering it through using tricks and hacks.
Reply
Holly Braverman
3/11/2017 10:29:01 pm
In his TED talk, biologist Donald Hoffman calls into question the notion that the human mind operates on and requires an accurate perception of reality. Hoffman argues that not only we do not truly see reality as it is (citing humanity’s old, incorrect beliefs such as the Earth being flat and the Earth being the unmoving center of the universe), but that natural selection — and consequently evolution — does not favor seeing reality as it is. The latter part of his theory, he explains, is supported by fitness, not reality as it is, being a key component of the equations of evolution. Hoffman goes on to say that evolution has given us an “interface” that hides reality and instead guides adaptive behavior — akin to the desktop interface on a computer that shows you files and images as opposed to the coding and software behind them. Hoffman states: “...reality, whatever it is, is the real source of cause and effect in the world; not brains, not neurons. Brains and neurons have no causal powers. They cause none of our perceptual experiences, and none of our behavior. Brains and neurons are a species-specific set of symbols, a hack”. The overall importance of Hoffman’s theory is that it, as he puts it, opens up new possibilities in relation to the mystery of consciousness. His theory questions reality itself, and in turn, how it affects our conscious experiences.
Reply
Holly Braverman
3/11/2017 10:31:59 pm
^Paragraph 1 @ "In his TED talk..."
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
January 2017
Categories |