š writer of https://xitter.cf/t.co/CPTdYGPzON š® pattern finder š§¬ neuroscience and psychology šļø perception and cognition š” chasing the light from beyond the veil
Joined January 2018
- Tweets2.1K
- Following255
- Followers734
- Likes2.7K
There was another comment that brought this study up and I replied.
My sense of nonspecific was that the psychedelics donāt inherently lead to sadness or happiness or a specific state but just enhance whatever is already happening. I donāt agree with that though.
Direction of political belief is an illusory axis. Going from slightly right to very right are two contradictory positions by their very nature of not being identical. The idea of āsinking deeperā into a belief system is illusory.
The flow of beliefs as political axis is largely social. The division between belief systems is manufactured conformity patterns that use peopleās desire for friendship and acceptance in many cases.
People can change in ways we would view as āextremeā, though viewing them that way is also relative and through training people to view someone that way.
Ordinary people engage in extreme behaviors like eating animals but we donāt view the normalized behavior as extreme because of that relativity.
There can be a āsinking deeperā in the sense that people accumulate more validation through motivation or curiosity. If they become less lazy or more curious or more hyper morally fixated after the psychedelic experience we might expect change of belief to manifest from change of information that is leading to beliefs.
Information is likely to change if one stops looping their daily lives repetitiously, depressively, habitually, uncuriously. I suppose I should clarify that curiosity doesnāt inherently lead to truth and none of what Iām saying is a defense of any political belief systems.
Direction of political belief is an illusory axis. Going from slightly right to very right are two contradictory positions by their very nature of not being identical. The idea of āsinking deeperā into a belief system is illusory.
The flow of beliefs as political axis is largely social. The division between belief systems is manufactured conformity patterns that use peopleās desire for friendship and acceptance in many cases.
People can change in ways we would view as āextremeā, though viewing them that way is also relative and through training people to view someone that way.
Ordinary people engage in extreme behaviors like eating animals but we donāt view the normalized behavior as extreme because of that relativity.
There can be a āsinking deeperā in the sense that people accumulate more validation through motivation or curiosity. If they become less lazy or more curious or more hyper morally fixated after the psychedelic experience we might expect change of belief to manifest from change of information that is leading to beliefs.
Information is likely to change if one stops looping their daily lives repetitiously, depressively, habitually, uncuriously. I suppose I should clarify that curiosity doesnāt inherently lead to truth and none of what Iām saying is a defense of any political belief systems.
All claims of anything should require evidence.
Youāre framing seems to view the responsibility for evidence like a social game.
The glutamate effects may oppose anesthetic mechanisms on some level, though I am not fully on board with the non-specific amplifier idea.
It could be partially true but I feel thereās also likely specific molding effects from other mechanisms that make things more specific.
It depends what mechanisms people believe underlies consciousness. Itās worth noting that saying ānoā is actually a positive claim about specific mechanisms of consciousness that would exclude AI. It would also require evidence to backup as would the yes answer.
āIdkā is better
I think the physics of time cut consciousness off from the past in a way thatās like the teleportation paradox.
I donāt think itās the same consciousness moment to moment. Itās just similar enough, with a narrative.
I think memory evolved to overcome this lack of persistence.
I agree with you btw. Though I am also claiming that passage through time is not different from the teleportation paradox. The paradox questions if our entirety was copied and pasted elsewhere, would we be the same consciousness?
I think passage through time is like teleportation and the physics of time cuts us off from actually existing across time such that we must rely on using intelligence mechanisms to infer what happened or will happen.
Even if neurons persist, I think it does not necessarily mean we experience real time thickness. And the time thickness we do seem to experience may be only in a specious present because the signal persisted across time rather than accessing actual temporal spacetime thickness. Rather than having direct access to the past and future.
I think itās more like the signals continued like a sustain pedal and not that we have access to more actual time.
I think thereās essentially a sustain like mechanism that can make events seem to persist in their time and thus allow those events to appear more simultaneous. I think this is part of how coincidence detection operates. I think the window is controlled based on context too.
Why does it seem like it? That implies evidence. Iām not necessarily talking about measurement with some device. Just is there any sense at all that itās continuous besides present moment memory which seems specifically evolved because itās not continuous?
Thereās people who really bring up ai causing our minds to atrophy but then omit the nuances in the research and then use the headlines like false citations as if they were ai hallucinated answers and also use the vague sense of authority by referencing science to manipulate people who are outsourcing their critical thinking to senses of authority similar to how people trust ai answers
People are generally insane from the get-go. They just adhere to whatās normal, which masks the weirdness. Their reaction is not from moving far from normal as much as it is moving far from āconfirmedā safety.
Theyāre just scared and thinking normal scared things.
Yess. Though itās apparent even earlier because the idea of articulation existing at all. If we ever struggle to come up with words, it is an example of how thoughts are not based on words.
LLMs reverse engineer a semblance of meaning from the hollow symbols.
In the future, we could create measuring devices made out of neurons that can measure consciousness objectively.
We often imagine thereās a divide between whatās physical versus mental, but this division is kind of like a division between seeing with the eyes versus seeing from within the brain.
Vision isnāt capable of observing such immense microscopic detail of the brainās architecture and we imagine what we see is the limit of the physical realm, and all the rest is non-physical or holographic.
Even our scientific tools of measuring the brain fall short. But thatās not to say that measuring the brain in such detail is impossible. Actually, on some level, I believe this is what the brain itself already does.
It may be that subjective experience is physical observation of physical consciousness. Part of the brain are observing the consciousness of other parts of the brain. In essence, they are communicating.
You could imagine that we might be able to bridge two brains so that each could read the otherās mind or even see from their eyes. If that occurred, the sense of separate identity would likely fall apart because whatever impacts one mind, influences the other, meaning itās all one self. Even if communication wasnāt complete.
This is how the brain already works.
In the case of blindsight, someone may have separated consciousnesses. To assume itās occurring non-consciously rather than separately conscious seems really dubious.