Do we see reality as it is? | Donald Hoffman | TED

[@ambrishjaiswal1286]

"enlightenment is a destructive process. It has nothing to do with becoming better or being happier. Enlightenment is the crumbling away of untruth. It's seeing through the facade of pretence. It's the complete eradication of everything we imagined to be true." - Adyashanti.

[@Fuar11]

@Rick B both

[@MrAkosFintor]

That’s dead on!

[@yojimbos1]

"Knowledge of the Big Picture is not conducive to happiness". Some French Philosopher at least as impenetrable as this Ted Talk.

[@vollinaadkins8118]

+(👑)- 1. And he said, "Whoever discovers the interpretation of these sayings will not experience death." +(+(+( www.surnamedb.com/Surname/Adkins )+)+)+ 24. His disciples said, "Show us the place where you are, for we must seek it." He said to them, "Anyone here with two ears had better listen! There is light within a person of light, and it shines on the whole world. If it does not shine, it is dark." +++((( kzbin.info/aero/LLeCalaHOVQvtV74g0Z6lWzA )))+++ At one time the Sprit an engery of the World was W(holy) a True reflection with Pyrmids all over all Paridice of the one God of all of all +(I)+ am the Son of God of all of all +(I)+ am the Sun God of the in(light)ed God of all of all Creation of Exsistance +(I)+ am the Good Truth of God of all of all +(I)+ am with the Reality check of all of all +(I)+ am Christ like the Atom Man of all of all +(I)+ am the Absloute Bigger Better Plan of the here an now of the Fool Theif Man God ×(👑)o of all of all +(I)+ am a Fact check God Truth a Reality check from the Farther Son an Theif (in) W(holy)Spirt of all of all negitivity two one nouthing two all of all Mankind of all of all Paridice +(I)+ Absloutly Positivily am, ... +(+(+( instagram.com/p/B6Qt6wjBdwk/? )+)+)+ +++((( instagram.com/p/B6QVppPhCTq/? )))+++ 50. Jesus said, "If they say to you, 'Where have you come from?' say to them, 'We have come from the light, from the place where the light came into being by itself, established [itself], and appeared in their image.' +(+(+( instagram.com/p/B6SApyzhT2u/? )+)+)+ Listen to all +(Good)+ by User 153418137 on #SoundCloud soundcloud.com/user-153418137/sets/all-good

[@youbean666]

@@vollinaadkins8118 I perceive gibberish

[@iamthew0lf]

I love that science is trying to tackle consciousness and reality now.

[@jefferyjames6842]

It always was ment to be tackled

[@iamthew0lf]

@@jefferyjames6842 It’s always been a theological or philosophical discussion. Science has always been the study of the tangible physical realm.

[@Serenitylovelightpeace]

Love the wolf 💜

[@boxingbarbarians]

It's not a case of "now". They always have been

[@twilighttraveler8739]

Science is the study of mathematics as it appears in a static equation and it therefore called “ a theory with or without a meaningful answer “. Philosophy is the actuality of reality as we see and perceive it as through multiple mirrors of consciousness. We can discuss philosophical musings and mathematical equations until the cows come home - £5.00 and a cup of Cappuccino and we are on our way to the very next coffee house revolution!

[@arcad1an292]

The reality we see is not matter, it is “what matters”

[@mykhailohohol8708]

he broke your brain didn't he

[@paulcunnane4]

That's pretty good dude!

[@cohenccc]

Nice

[@azalm1126]

12 rules for life eh?

[@TJ-kk5zf]

exactly!!!

[@jeffsanders444]

If my perception is real, this was a fascinating TED talk. Loved it!

[@alichiffra6455]

Your perception was subjectively tuned to find it fascinating. It is because of your cognitive and intuitive ability to understand the linguistic symbolism of the Ted Talk. And it was pleasurable to your brain because your brain specifically has been trained to find pleasure in higher intellectual interest and interaction. The same talk wouldn't appeal to someone who is intellectually inferior.

[@semisikaufusi2467]

I agree, reality is fluid…but FIT trumps all

[@vz4779]

Thank you for making me smile.

[@daheikkinen]

It was an illusion.

[@skatedraco182]

It was cool but not real lmao

[@erikhm_]

The fact that we have no real clue what reality really is amazes me. So much could be out there that we just can’t perceive

[@kuri190]

Some do know though... But most dont listen to those who know as they dismiss it as bs...

[@kuri190]

Some know the complete Truth, the problem is sharing it with others because others are sucked in the matrix and delusion

[@wakeup5998]

Where should I start looking in your opinion?

[@kuri190]

@@wakeup5998 inform yourself a bit about spirituality and non duality! There are a lot of fake gurus and those who speak from beliefs so beware!

[@Nanette_DeCardenas]

Best way to know reality is the Blind / Deaf man.

[@so0p312b01i]

He was my first year and favorite professor at UCI in 2008. :)

[@extremeweather1115]

Taha Babikir Who said it does?

[@TheGreatAlan75]

@Taha Babikir don't act like I'm the bad guy. You took a neutral statement and said something negative and annoying. You just don't appreciate me pointing it out. Maybe you should just STFU

[@TheGreatAlan75]

It doesn't make you great !!!!!

[@TheGreatAlan75]

@Taha Babikir you are correct... I'm a hypocrite. Sorry

[@davidblack5527]

@BMW Kingz, you're really lucky.

[@mickblock]

I'm about a minute in and can already tell I'm gonna have to watch this more than once.

[@birdieperchy4501]

+Michael Block Anyone else doing it for psych homework? I have to write a paper on this stupid thing. And why is psych so freaking SUBJECTIVE?

[@Aliens-Are-Our-Friends2027]

also going to have to try 1g of magic mushrooms and contemplate

[@supercoolsam1159]

have you tried psychedelics ?

[@nfrench2100]

Birdie Perchy how old are you now? I’d like to know how you feel about this today

[@blacktortoise6812]

His theory is wack. It jumps the shark and says reality is nothing like what we perceive. And that consciousness is like a little sandbox world. That we imagine up or something?

[@michaelt1775]

The more I listen to hoffman the more sense he makes. This subject is insane and fascinating and also a accurate description. This makes total sense when you think about it and look at physics

[@chetsenior7253]

Physics is a ghost that we all believe in.

[@NickyHornaday-cu1zz]

​@@chetsenior7253😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊

[@TheGuiltsOfUs]

No it does not.

[@ajahnpadawan8812]

I can get and understand the basics of this model. However I struggle to understand the personal feelings beyond. Eg how/why are there people we feel a spiritual connection with but others who mean nothing?

[@i3cq]

There's a shrimp with more color receptors, and me as a colorblind with less, we see different than nomral people do. So we have different views of reality just with colors, but they are still our reality. When you play a game, you dont look at the code, but just because the code makes you see something it doesnt make that something not real. It is more like a representation, so that instead of you having to understand the code, you can simply look at it and quickly understand it. All of this is real, we just dont see the "code" behind it

[@vjnt1star]

13:40 "Evolution has shaped us with perception symbols", "We should take them seriously but not literally" Nicely put

[@forthfarean]

vjnt1star Damn clever this evolution.

[@roiferreach100]

Evolution is the tool to understand the real God.

[@Greeneyes3005]

Nemo of Erewhon yeah it’s so clever... some need glasses to see!!! Hmmmmm? 🤔🤓🤓

[@ErikAdalbertvanNagel]

@@roiferreach100 god is not real, only exist in your head and those who believe in a supernatural creator being

[@sharonbutchart1502]

Thank the mushroom for our smarts 😜

[@Sargaxon]

This is probably the best TED talk I watched in my life.

[@epsomvince5950]

You really need to get out more....!!!

[@LocChicago5]

I forgot the name but there is one about mushrooms and how everything in the world is connected to mushrooms and how we can use mushrooms to eat away nuclear waist and use mushrooms to heal are body or mushrooms to trip out there is mushrooms for everything

[@petergedd9330]

@@LocChicago5 There's not mushroom in my apartment

[@counterculture10]

It was indeed excellent!

[@moondawwg]

No mames tampoco es para tanto mi chato.

[@vanhouten64]

I used to wonder if the objects in my house existed when I was away; now I'm wondering if they exist when I'm at home.

[@The678error]

well, someday you will wonder if you even exist

[@barnaliadhikary9421]

I doubt whether I exist while the objects in my house existed and whether you exist while I existed🙄🙄

[@jyjt2903]

In sleep I stop to exist.

[@MattBurosh]

That's so funny! Whenever I come back from vacation, I always ponder the idea of, "Did all of my crap just sit here in silence for thousands of seconds on end, just awaiting my return to make them real again??" Obviously, the answer is yes, but it's fun to think about!

[@JudeMalachi]

@@jyjt2903 Is this really true? It's not true for me, but I would assert that's only because I've developed metacognitive introspective awareness through Samatha meditation. I would also assert that you don't cease to exist so much as your awareness becomes so dull that it doesn't really form substantial memories and you're simply unaware of your existence while you sleep after you’ve awoken.

[@MahendraSingh-te3fm]

This ted is a scientific explanation of the Non-Dualism in which everything is considered a form of consciousness. Consciousness is the ultimate reality. When my eyes are closed this ted talk is not a talk but a form of consciousness and when I open my eyes my brain/perception interprets it as a ted talk but in reality it is still the ultimate consciousness.

[@amihartz]

His arguments make no sense. He talks about the behavior of the crab as if the "hard problem of consciousness" has to do with behavioralism. It does not. You don't understand the hard consciousness problem if you think it can be explained by talking about cognitive processing and behavioralism, which is all Hoffman's "theorem" deals with. Both Non-Dualism and Idealism fail because they fail to substantiate their premise that reality is invisible and its observable properties are all created by "consciousness."

[@ivyverdant]

So intriguing and thought provoking. So glad there are intelligent people out there that can go through that thought process and science without freaking out. A lot of people just simply won't go there because it crushes our perception of reality and that can be very damaging to some people, a lot of people.

[@ChrisJones-ll3zc]

I damaged myself quite a bit the other day. I almost had a panic attack. This is actually a heavy realization and it’s almost criminal to share with anyone. I came to the realization that nothing in reality actually has a purpose or meaning and it was terrifying

[@IAn0nI]

@@ChrisJones-ll3zc the beauty of that realisation that life is objectively meaningless means that you are free to choose and interpret it's meaning! It's all relative. It's all perception.

[@stunnedmulletblah9714]

@@ChrisJones-ll3zc try God, you might be surprised. He's knocking now

[@ChrisJones-ll3zc]

@@IAn0nI I can’t agree but still you’re 100% right

[@ChrisJones-ll3zc]

@@stunnedmulletblah9714 sure 🙄

[@Ral9284]

_"Reality, a user friendly interface."_ Intriguing thinking.

[@truedeadandlife]

It is true, we design the world around to fit our needs. We have our perception as our UI and keep optimizing the space around us.

[@Ral9284]

Welcome to the Matrix!

[@raymadein6969]

More like welcome to the universe.

[@matthewbarnes7029]

More like just welcome....

[@holleey]

Ral Crux it's so user friendly that we lose ourselves in it.

[@leksious]

Some studies say that schizophrenia patients are less likely to be fooled by visual illusions than others. Maybe schizophrenia patients are having some sort of information overflow due to lack of construction capabilities of brain, not connecting sensations with their meaning and mixing signals coming from their mind with their sensations. Some sort of inability to create strong neural pathways. On the other hand this weakness could be the cause for creativity. Finding loose logical connections between things that are not usually thought to be connected with each other. After all the difference between a genius and madness is said to be fine line.

[@TS-hw7ro]

I dont think there is a line

[@softgoodsint]

@@TS-hw7ro= Good comments, and call me crazy, but the way I know there is said line is that I've spent my life on the wrong side of it

[@Superdisco199]

Yes, sometimes I think mental illness could be ill attempts to process information others can't sense/perceive or maybe more simply put - a faulty connection to the matrix :-D Interface theory is like other astrophysics theories that there are more dimensions and connections than we can perceive and some of us may have evolved slightly differently.

[@eriksantos418]

I recently learned of a story that happened in Brazil... an elderly woman was hired to take care of a couple's baby daughter (she is schizophrenic) one day he was cooking pork in the oven, the father came home and realized that his daughter was gone, he found her...

[@viewfinder1801]

I agree with your analysis. It is like altering the name of the computer file on the desktop. If the brain expects one thing and gets something completely confusing instead, it must create a narrative to fill in the blanks.

[@jefferylarkin3290]

We only see a very small amount in the visual spectrum, there are frequencies in the audio spectrum we can't hear as well,there you go.They have proved that photons ,which is light,behaves differently when observerd with the human eye,that is mind blowing.

[@lkececi7513]

Trust me , ican hear it, I hear everything , silence is golden

[@jaydawg7820]

A quote from the movie 'Bull Durham' Susan Sarandon 'Annie' comes to mind ..."The world is made for people who aren’t cursed with self-awareness..."

[@raymukhtar6806]

without self awareness your intelligence will turn on itself, so good luck

[@markgray2962]

@@raymukhtar6806 The opposite is the case I think.

[@MikeMike-nf1jy]

Old movie yet u bring a quote from it

[@grebulon9558]

The Universe is a vast consciousness, and we are all connected individual parts of this consciousness. We cannot see this while we are going through the human experience, but when we 'move-on' (die), that's when our perceptions expand and the blinkers come off, so we experience reality as it is. That's my take. Keeps me sane while going through this insane human experience 😃

[@undercoveragent9889]

"The Universe is a vast consciousness, and we are all connected individual parts of this consciousness." "We cannot see this while we are going through the human experience, but when we 'move-on' (die), that's when our perceptions expand and the blinkers come off, so we experience reality as it is." Do you people actually ever think about what you post? Ever? For how long have you been dead? You are telling us what you see whilst claiming that only dead people can see what you see.

[@grebulon9558]

Undercover Agent: What you see, hear, smell, feel, taste. Do you think this is all there is? I hope not. We are conditioned from birth, in western society in particular, to be logical and obedient, relying utterly on our five senses for our beliefs. Enables 'the powers that be' to pretty-much programme us into certain patterns of behaviour. And wow, does it work! I believe that there is more to life. No, I'm not relgious. But yes, I have had 'contacts' from people who have, as I put it, 'moved on'. Impossible to describe in words. But very definite, very real, and yes, a bit 'hairy' the first time! There is so much that is deliberately not taught to us about life, so that most of us close our minds to the possibilities. We we can do, is to try not to be so programmed and conditioned, that we stand no viewpoint other than that proferred by our five senses. We are more than the sum of our parts.

[@undercoveragent9889]

@@grebulon9558 "Do you think this is all there is? I hope not." No and that's my point. Remembering, thinking, talking, learning as _well_ as our senses inform us about the world around us. It is clear that the organic matter between the ears plays a part in the _quality_ of the consciousness. I mean, someone with a degree in physics will have functional differences to the consciousness of someone living in a mud-hut in sub-Saharan Africa, right? "There is so much that is deliberately not taught to us about life, so that most of us close our minds to the possibilities." I agree but _knowing_ that does set you on a path to truth, if you really want it. Knowing you have been misled at least gives you the opportunity to set about challenging your assumptions. It causes you to be more critical, more thorough; wiser. "No, I'm not relgious. But yes, I have had 'contacts' from people who have, as I put it, 'moved on'." I have a real problem with doublets like this. How can one accept the existence of some supernatural realm _and_ reject religion? I think that a supernatural realm is a prerequisite for religion and obviously, the supernatural realm is a prerequisite for your position too so to me, your position has all the hallmarks of a variation on the theme of some religion. But let me ask you this in good faith: you already said that we are deliberately not taught about life. I took you to mean by that that you think that many of the people around want to see us fail and that although they do not have your interests at heart, they act as if they do and lead you down false paths... or something _like_ that... Well, why should you trust the advice from a supernatural realm any more than you would trust advice from the material world? I mean, how can you be sure that those on 'the other side' have your best interests at heart? Maybe they have been forced to misinform you by some devilish spirit that despises all of mankind? How can you _test_ the quality of the information you receive from such a source without resorting to a 'religious-type' faith? "We are more than the sum of our parts." Yes, we are. :)

[@grebulon9558]

You make some interesting points, Undercover Agent. Regarding 'the afterlife' - if we can call it that: Personally, I see no requirement to be religious in order to believe in the afterlife. Einstein said he believed in the afterlife, because of energy. Energy can relay, it can transform, but it cannot just cease. So when we 'die' our energy has to go somewhere. I'm with Einstein on this one! As an aside: ever seen a film called 'Powder' starring Sean Patrick Flannery and Jeff Goldblum? Fiction, of course, but most engaging. Gets the brain-gears cranking Re what happens when a person 'dies'. Great film, I think. Speaking of objectivity vs subjectivity: as everyone perceives the World subjectively, through their five senses, maybe absolutely everything is subjective (?) Not that I'll try walking in front of a bus to test this out (!), but you get my general point. Perhaps we are nothing more than the memories we keep. Perhaps Elon Musk is right, thinking we live in a simulation. Who knows! Something strange happpened with the two Voyager probes when they 'left' the Solar System, that's for sure. Evolution: If we are evolved from apes... why are there still apes? The concept of infinity: We can't grasp it. If the universe has a boundary, what is after that boundary? People believe in 'The Big Bang', that the universe was once infinitely small. How, in any way, is that possible?!?!? I think it is good to question everything. Just not all the time (!) And don't expect too many answers, just more questions, and an increasingly open mind. I cannot think that this World is all there is. The human race is just clearly insane, and some of the most insane are at the top of the pyramid power structure. War games, anyone? I saw a comment online recently that made me laugh but I found quite accurate: "We now basically live in a Clown Society, where we are constantly punched in the face and told it's for our own health." A final thought: Socrates: To be is to do. Sartre: To do is to be. Sinatra: Do be do be do. I'm with Sinatra 😆

[@undercoveragent9889]

@@grebulon9558 "If we are evolved from apes... why are there still apes? " If dogs are evolved from wolves, why are there still wolves? "Socrates: To be is to do. Sartre: To do is to be. Sinatra: Do be do be do." lol I like you; I think we would get on if we were acquainted. We wouldn't agree on much but I think you are probably a good person and that trumps everything. Take care, dude.

[@TheGilmourJones]

Each and every person that ever existed has had a unique perspective of every moment of their existence. Even two people in the back of the crowd in this video sitting side by side, their view is almost identical just the smallest degree of difference but the difference does exist. Now if my first sentence is true then as our reality is based on our perspective we have to see that each and every person has had their own absolutely unique reality. So now we arrive at the thought that when we look at a society we are seeing a galaxy of realities all of them separate and unique. So when we say that someone is mentally ill because they have suffered a break from reality, then the question must be whose reality?

[@dismalthoughts]

The one that we jointly agree on. Like you said, 2 people sitting in the audience have only a minor difference in perspective. If you asked them, they would probably both agree that they saw Donald Hoffman giving a talk. Everyone there would. So anyone who saw Donald Duck giving a talk probably ought to see a doctor, because that level of disagreement with the majority vote on reality could be anything from a whimsical way to experience reality to a minor nuisance to a huge hindrance navigating reality to a terminal brain tumor.

[@s.muller8688]

There can only be a collective consciousness. Unless we create every single thought on the basics of an original idea. Which is not the case.

[@jeanneelliott7243]

Psychosis occurs for beings who are disassociated from the common reality. Common reality is a group experience. The largest group who agrees on the experience is not considered psychotic. Crazy?!

[@TheGilmourJones]

@@jeanneelliott7243 And unfortunately common reality can be manipulated. Political, religious, etc….

[@tamaskoko8220]

I think what he was saying is that there is one reality and we all perceive/experience it uniquely and theres just commonality that we can agree on, there isnt more than one. I think

[@kevankwok01]

I thought of the same metaphor years ago, calling reality an interface, just like the interface of a computer. Time & space is like the desktop, objects are like the icons & physics is like the rules governing the interaction between the icons & desktop. What's powering the interface of our reality? The code of consciousness. It's like a quantum supercomputer, taking every possible position simultaneously. It's quite surreal to hear the exact analogy used by someone else years later. I also see dreams like metaphors for how the illusion of life could be created. We each dream, create our own universes with their own rules of physics somehow, the characters within your dream all think they are separate, yet they stem from one mind. Your subconscious creates situations & fractals of itself to learn about itself & grow in a sort of sandbox environment. Imagine a mind much more powerful than ours. Instead of running 8-18 characters at once in a dream, it can run 8-800 trillion characters at once. It would also mean the entire dream world is conscious in that it is composed of thought, albeit at different levels of consciousness depending on their level of awareness of being. A person character in the dream is more conscious than a rock, yet at a certain level of growth, which appears to be one of the fundamental guiding principles, the character person realises they are an avatar, an interface for the source mind, expressing itself through you. At which point they could simultaneously have an existential crisis, a sense of solitude as not many others in their virtual world understands them, a sense of awe in the beauty of the illusion & a sense of comfort in the unknown. We are the universe experiencing itself in order to grow & learn from experience. It is likely there are many parallel universes & forms of sentience in other dimensions. it would mean the separation is all an illusion. That everyone is truly interconnected on a conscious level.

[@TheGuiltsOfUs]

This solipsistic idea is debunked by the universal experience of every human.

[@leafyleafyleaf]

Thanks for that interesting comment! You have given it a lot of thought. I find a lot of freedom in not being tied to this physical existence. But I figure I am here to fulfill some end, so I will do my part and live my life until its natural end. Who knows, maybe each of us is an individual trial in some cosmic Monte Carlo simulation.

[@bitphr3ak]

"If the doors of perception were cleansed everything would appear to man as it is, infinite" - William Blake

[@colagirl765]

Mmm

[@bitphr3ak]

@@colagirl765 - things that make you go "Mmm"!

[@pablomoore7557]

William Blake seemed to have had some kind of interesting neurodiversity as it is say now

[@platypusssss]

I spend a really long time watching and rewatching different parts of this video. I got a lot of new, unexpected input. I read/know many different journals/articles about human perception and construction of reality, but I still get this feeling of helplessness when being faced with the possibility of spending my life as a "human beetle", totally unaware of my blindspots in my everyday life, Thank you Donald Hoffman for this talk!

[@RussFling]

Merlas Sakari You have 2 blind spots! Where your optical nerve meets up with the retina there are no rods or cones and so you don't receive any actual image data from these spots. They're right in the middle of your visual field, but your brain fills in the gaps.......

[@ibis0921]

Russell Fling more than 2 I would think. All of your sensory input could be blind spot. Even reasoning and technology itself could be a blind spot because it could be tuned to further our evolutionary progression. If we ever figure out what reality really is we can't stop using the interface before us but the implications might change the direction of progression.... or not. still very interesting.

[@Skweepa]

Merlas Sakari It makes me excited that there is plenty still out there to be discovered. Just like the microscope, we may some day invent a spiritual microscope or other sensory tools that allow us to see beyond our beetle-esque minds. Maybe some day we will wear a metaphorical microscope all day every day...and it will wonderfully and beautifully change the way we perceive and navigate the world. Maybe we'll see alternate dimensions and learn something enlightening from alter-dimensional beings. ...Finding out that you're dreaming isn't depressing, it just means you may one day wake up. ...And you can take this reality a little more lightheartedly.

[@osbogosley]

Merlas Sakari I call it park dog duty. Life is our choice, to be surprised. I go out doing what I have learned to do to make my way. The surprises are a welcome tree to pee on.

[@AirAfter]

meh

[@justsaying9483]

Genes are a miracle too. The idea that knowledge can be passed down for generations inside a tiny particle with no brain is amazing

[@Xbangsplot]

It took a long time to discover the gene responsible for shyness because it was hiding behind a bunch of other genes.

[@Yo1shadyfan]

Similar concept is 'memes' i.e. social ideas spreading and evolving using humans without any regard for them.

[@carriagereturned3974]

@@Yo1shadyfan egregor, "energetic" being, humans are just hosts. "memes" are not ideas (ideas of what?!), but informational entities.

[@amnon460]

Yes, the idea that knowledge can be passed down for generations inside a tiny particle with no brain is as amazing as it is demonstrably false. Genes are mostly responsible for protein coding. The big hopes genetic sequencing seemed to deliver turned out as vapor causing the huge investments done in this direction to yield little to no return.

[@rckflmg94]

genes pass down information and instructions. Like how grandma passes down her recipes to her daughter. Cells also work without brains.

[@BioChemistryWizard]

Immanuel Kant and Plato were geniuses. We don’t see reality as it really is but instead visualize ideas that are easy for our mind to understand, then all that we perceive are just symbols representing the true world. For example, Native speakers of Japanese find it difficult to distinguish between the sounds of the letters l and r whereas native speakers of English find those sounds to be completely different. This kind of thing is a regular source of difficulty for people learning a new language. It happens because, once one has learned a language, your brain categorizes sounds into groupings that are meaningful for a given language and totally ignores sound differences that are unimportant for that language. L and r aren’t different in Japanese so there is no need for Japanese people to learn how to distinguish between them. Hoffman’s theory certainly describes how the sense of smell works. We don’t perceive odors as belong to chemical types (hydroxyl, ketone, aldehyde, unsaturated, etc.) . Instead we perceive categories like fruity, floral, pungent, rotten, etc. Color is another example. Light is a continuous spectrum but our minds perceive discontinuous colors. It is hard to say whether other aspects of vision work this way. It is very unsettling to think that we don’t see the world as it is.

[@paulocardoso7472]

Read your comment and went to explore more of that relationship between Hoffman's ideas and Kant/Plato theories with the help of GPT-4. I first asked if it knew this presentation, to which it replied yes and gave me a very accurate description of Hoffman's TED Talk. Then, I asked about similarities between Hoffman's perspective and the theories of Plato and Kant, I'll leave the answer it gave me here: (GPT-4 answer) Donald Hoffman's perspective shares some similarities with the ideas of both Plato and Immanuel Kant, two influential philosophers who also questioned the nature of reality and the limits of human perception. Plato's Allegory of the Cave: In this allegory, Plato describes a group of people who are chained inside a cave since birth, facing a blank wall. Their only source of information about the world comes from the shadows cast on the wall by objects and figures outside the cave. The prisoners eventually mistake these shadows for reality itself. When one prisoner is freed and discovers the outside world, he realizes the limitations of his previous perception. Plato uses this allegory to illustrate that our perceptions might not fully represent the true nature of reality, and that there could be a higher level of understanding or reality beyond what we directly perceive. Hoffman's ideas resonate with Plato's allegory because both suggest that our perceptions do not provide a direct and accurate representation of reality. Instead, they argue that what we perceive is a simplified, shadow-like version of the underlying truth. Immanuel Kant's Phenomena and Noumena: Kant made a distinction between two aspects of reality - phenomena and noumena. Phenomena are the things that we can perceive and experience through our senses, which are subject to the constraints of our cognitive faculties. Noumena, on the other hand, represent the true nature of reality as it exists independently of our perception. According to Kant, we cannot have direct knowledge of noumena because our cognitive faculties and senses limit our understanding of the world. Hoffman's perspective aligns with Kant's ideas in that both emphasize the limitations of human perception in grasping the true nature of reality. While Hoffman uses the metaphor of a user interface to describe our perception, Kant's distinction between phenomena and noumena serves a similar purpose, highlighting the difference between what we perceive and the objective reality that exists beyond our perception. In summary, both Plato and Kant's ideas share similarities with Hoffman's perspective in that all three challenge the notion that our perceptions provide a direct and accurate representation of reality, emphasizing the limitations of human perception and the possible existence of a more fundamental reality beyond our immediate experience

[@amihartz]

Your comment is incredibly confused and just shows how Kant and Plato, including Hoffman, are complete sophists who just string words together even if they do not make any sense. Symbols are *_not_* perceptions. They are normative constructs used to *_identify_* certain sets of perceptions. They thus arise from our abilities to *_interpret_* reality, such as, to identify and judge a certain sensation as that of a "rock" and to say "that's a rock over there" is a judgement, an interpretation, it is not a perception. The judgement is applied _to_ a perception but is not _itself_ a perception. Nothing about you, Kant, Plato, or Hoffman demonstrates we cannot perceive reality. You constantly confuse the _behavior_ of cognitive interpretation with perception itself. Behavorialist arguments have no relevance.

[@BioChemistryWizard]

@@amihartz Question. Do you think bats perceive reality "as it is"?

[@amihartz]

@@BioChemistryWizard There is a reality from the context of the bat which it perceives it exactly as it is.

[@EGarrett01]

19:06 "Perception is not about seeing truth, it's about having kids." This is so obvious once you realize it, and explains so much about human behavior, but might be difficult to see or accept before you do realize it.

[@XTSY]

Why?

[@troydavis1]

this was the worst and most dangerous idea ever, a fallacy, total bunch of junk, dressed up in a nice sweet sauce, catering to your need to feel all powerful by believing there is no reality and we make it all up. Its about the worst idea and lie in the universe, and its totally arrogant and egocentric ! mind boggling how people gobble up any nonsense as long as its presented with sciency words. Use your BRAIN and dont let this snake oil salesman convince you there is no reality !!

[@lyricessence]

@@troydavis1 So, you flunked math?

[@troydavis1]

@@lyricessence yeah, especially tensor calculations on 4-manifolds in General relativity in undergrad :-), and you ? How far did you get before failing math ??

[@whinskyujima6529]

My love for neuroscience is unmatched. The fact that we perceive things that they are not as literally as we see them, still buffles me. It also draws me to the question, is life simply an illusion?

[@tanishksingh8285]

No,life is not an illusion but our physical reality is all not there is to reality,also our perception of reality is almost accurate. People act like it is so inaccurate when it isn't.

[@treich1234]

Life itself is not an illusion but our perceptions of it sure can be

[@tanishksingh8285]

@@treich1234 yeah you are right.

[@xenphoton5833]

@@tanishksingh8285 what is reality

[@dismalthoughts]

@@tanishksingh8285 Depends on how you look at it, I guess. Physics tells us space is mostly empty and there is no physical matter -- only energy. That's not what we perceive. And at the very least, our perception is terribly incomplete. We only see

[@kevinnugent6530]

There have been multiple instances in my life where I realized, "there is reality and it is not at all what I see day to day." It was like seeing something too big for my mind so my mind spit it out. But I saw it.

[@world2296]

I’ve had this throughout my life too

[@daisy7442]

Touching the life unexpectedly is a complete different quality than exploring it scientifically with the use of the mind. All these talks seem fascinating but do not mean anything at all since it's still a construction of the mind. But that's alright, that what can be done with this limited conciousnes.

[@Man_fay_the_Bru]

For example?

[@kevinnugent6530]

@@Man_fay_the_Bru I don't have any clearer explanation of what occurred to me.

[@MichelleAntonia]

What did you see?

[@VOLightPortal]

I have always felt that we as humans have always been like blind worms wiggling around the belly of the universe not really capable of perceiving reality as it is but only perceiving in a way that helps us narrowingly survive to reproduce. But what Hoffman is positing is so much more deeper, and shocking.

[@on-knee]

Sounds like decay! If it’s the belly of the Universe, we are the maggots festering in the corpse shell of its former ego.

[@elijahballinger8]

@@on-kneehow?

[@on-knee]

@@elijahballinger8 Well, what does death mean to you?

[@amihartz]

You have no evidence for that. Hoffman's argument is entirely behavioralist. The fact that a beetle can misinterpret reality and take on behavior counterproductive to it based on that fault interpretation tells us nothing about whether or not the beetle actually _sees_ reality. You can open up the beetle's eyes and brain and come to derive its behavior from the physical processes in its biology. Hoffman entirely conflates the ability to _experience_ with _the behavior of interpretation_ and tries to use the failure of the latter to prove the failure of the former, yet it is a non-sequitur.

[@PachucoDesigns]

As much as I love TED Talks, I have never understood why this question is so confounding. Now, to be fair, it does depend what you mean. "If noses didn't exist, would odors exist?" Well, that depends on what you're referring to when you say "odors." If you mean the object you detect with that sense, a collection of particles on the air, then yes. If you mean the particular sensation we experience when we smell odors, then most likely not. Do we see reality as it is? No. It's not even up for discussion. There are things we know exist that we can't see. It's either too small, too big, too slow, too fast, or simply is not in the small spectrum of light the human eye can see. We cannot see ultraviolet light the way honey bees do. We cannot detect sound reflected from small objects like bats do. And we cannot smell the pheromone scent trail ants leave behind them to do everything they do. We are limited to our senses, and therein to their thresholds. There is a word for this, it's called the Umwelt. To deep sea creatures, sound does not exist. To bacteria, taste does not exist. And to us, were it not for scientific deduction, electrons wouldn't exist. So the question then becomes, WHY do we perceive the world the way we do? Why does salt taste the way salt tastes? Is my red the same as your red? Well, answering that would require us to examine our own brains outside of our epistemic barrier, which is impossible by definition. We may gain a better understanding in the future, but we will never have a definite answer.

[@justgivemethetruth]

***** What is up for discussion is how we miss seeing reality and why? Makes me thing of the book "Thinking, Fast and Slow" which goes through a huge list of logical errors people make when they apply or misapply their brains. Another one is "Simple Truths, Vital Lies" which explains in logical detail how and why we de-focus on certain things.

[@ibis0921]

***** but its bigger than that. I agree that our beings are tuned to understand what is favorable for our existence and that is not reality as you pointed out. I think the larger point is that brains, neurons, atoms, electrons, don't exist even as we have observed them to exist. That reality at its most fundamental level may not be at all what we think it is. If thats a natural thought for you that awesome and your really intelligent for thinking. I think for me whats more insane is not the the conclusion he comes to but the implications that that conclusion brings up about the nature of the universe we live in. Maybe all of the scientific discoveries and ideas we have had are all just apart of our evolutionary progression towards survival and the reality is far.... far.... far.... different then we even know. If that's the case and if we can understand the coding of this universal structure how will that shape the way we see ourselves and the universe philosophically as well as scientifically. I don't know i thought it was a pretty awesome talk.

[@filipsky3248]

***** Fortunately, after few minutes of this talk, it turned out that it's not about the question "if a tree falls in a forest does it make a sound", as was my prejudice :)

[@Nashy119]

Daniel Cobar I think it is something many people think about when they are growing up. "I'm 14 and this is deep" as the internet would say. I still think it was an entertaining talk and will be useful to some people though.

[@bigfletch8]

***** "We" belongs to the world of empiricism. The answer is realized only by "I". Try substituting for "we" in your last sentence. Always a very good exercise ;-)

[@amnar3786]

Hands down. This is the best ted talk I've watched so far.

[@perfectfutures]

One of the best TED talks I've seen. what we seen is just the icons on a screen, not the massive reality, which we could hardly handle, that lies beyond them.

[@HelloJamesBond]

That's one of the best analogies I've ever heard.

[@PandukaNeluwala]

Yeah

[@Messerschmitt823]

Well said sir.

[@viktorbirkeland6520]

Yep. I mean, evolutionarily speaking, you don't really need to percieve anything further than a few kilometers, and most of our senses are really a lot shorter than that. What gets me is the argument of colour. Do we see colour the same way? And if so, how can we possibly know? If your red was my blue, sure some people would prefer different colours, but we do so already. You could theoretically make an argument that everyone, all the people on earth, has the same favourite 'perceived' colour, but that our eyes decide the light waves hitting our retinas aren't the same. Because objectively, things don't have colour. In a vacuum, with no light, everything looks the same. Yes, things have different reflectivety, but without a light source, things don't have colour, and under different kinds of light, the exact same things suddenly change colour, without anything on the object itself changing, just the light source. So is everything just black then, only gaining colour when light is reflected by it? I don't know, I'm not smart enough to know such things, but it does truly fascinate me that it's possible that what I call Green, you could perceive as what I call red. These are only relative terms, and as long as we both see the same things or colours reflected uniformally, i.e you see all my reds as your greens, and vice versa, we would never know about it, because the reflectivety stays the same, we see the same colours as reds and greens our whole life, and what you perceive is only yours, you can't show other people what you perceive!

[@a42lalrinkimi48]

@@viktorbirkeland6520 I was JUST thinking about this analogy today. We don't even know what we think we know. What i see is what my brain is telling me i am seeing. I have had hallucinations and they seemed so real to me, yet no one else would see them, But there they were, to my brain it was there. Even different animals see colours we can not see.

[@mikerayco]

I can't still fully wrap my head around the topic but I am mind blown. I think this is the best ted talk I have watched so far.

[@tieref7432]

This is how reality is my friend, we're all the same, no one is better than someone else, there is no ego, i am u, u are me, we are everything, we are the universe, in a sense, we are reality, but as alan watts once said, reality cannot be explained by words, it can only be experienced

[@percanatord3461]

@@tieref7432 exactly spot on we're all family of consciousness we're literally a tiny grain of sand in the universe your body is just a vessel that your borrowing until it's your time to give it back

[@mariusloveless7880]

@@percanatord3461 Fascinating to think about really. I firmly KNOW that we are each other, we are an expanse of the same "thing", we are not even a certain being or object exclusively, we are not together a formation of a particular thing, but actually we are just the same exact singular "thing" that is. You, I, that other person, the Earth, Sun , Stars, and the Moon, we are just "it" being, we are little "it's" being "IT". This is profound and brings amazing realizations about God or the idea of God. The Christian Bible is a book that seems to be a book FAR too complicated for religious people to even grasp, the more I research and study it. I think we did get ahold of a concept of God in that book but Christians completely got it wrong and shaped it into this story that makes "sense" to them. I say all this because in the Bible God clearly says, that its name is "I Am", no other name, it just states "I AM". So, Ancient desert dwelling men interpreted that statement as "God" saying its name, this was a failure of perception of reality by Man. I think what actually happened was, WE, YOU, ME, US, simply told ourselves that WE ARE, thusly saying to us, "I AM", we don't ask ourselves our name, we already know who we are, We are and if asked such an absurd question, even more absurdly positing that absurd question to our own self we would have no other answer to ourselves than well, "I AM". We asked our self, "Who are you?", and we answered to our self, "I AM"......and that's just Christianity.....Buddhism, Hinduism and other philosophies have their own clues and evidence that we are all one "thing" .

[@tvv2281]

@@mariusloveless7880 You put it way more eloquently than I ever could have, but this is exactly the conclusion I came to the other day.

[@paula19335]

​@@tieref7432 your comment gived me goosebumps because I know is true.. I am you.. you are me.. we are everything and we are nothing.. all at once. SF is nothing compared to 'reality'

[@tonoornottono]

All of us are individual rays of sunlight that have each forgotten that we are the sun.

[@yoyoyo1penaldo]

Ooops ! That's cooooooool

[@masonmartin1464]

Pleeaseeeee elaborate!!

[@masonmartin1464]

Sun? That’s why we began worshipping the sun?

[@jyjt2903]

Metaphorically speaking we are sun,but afraid to accept,it create a danger to ego i.e. illusory I

[@masonmartin1464]

@@jyjt2903 How are we metaphorically The sun?

[@ArtVandelay99]

What a fantastically modest man Don is, for all his brilliance. Also, Chris really deserves all his success I think: unlike many other conference chairs who just show up for questions afterwards as a token but then wait for the speaker to finish so they can move in in their list, he actually takes part in the conversation and *is interested*! Two brilliant men, great video

[@recalcitrist1]

Cognitive dissonance is necessary in order to process new information that challenges our old paradigm in the process of seeing reality as it is.

[@justinebeaver1419]

+recalcitrist1 Totally agree.....it's not like cognitive dissonance is a _bad_ thing ;)

[@chatek3858]

agree

[@ietsbram]

and not overload

[@2030matrix]

I agree. There are many who try to hold on to old models and refuse to go with current information. That is the way of science and I guess it's best.

[@msflyingfree7]

Unfortunately many stay in cognitive dissonance - living in the crazy world of mental gymnastics, holding on to old paradigms way longer than is healthy - destroying themselves and the planet along the way.

[@peacesound1101]

This is definitely going forward! I cannot share my experiences without arousing doubts from others that these experiences aren't "hallucinations". If you open to the never ending science you leave the cozy but dark world of ordinary consciousness

[@to2burger]

Well said

[@mukhtarh5435]

Care to elaborate

[@caroldelosangeles3621]

Same happened to me. Well said👏

[@thisisme5487]

I'd still like to hear some of what you're talking about. It's built into us for the most part to not be able to believe others' experiences that dwell outside the realm of the normally/daily perceived, and even experiencing things yourself might not be able to break that mold. But the more you subject yourself to it whether through personal experience or hearing others' exeriences that may relate to your own, the more you fit the pieces together. I like to think of our perceptions as incomplete puzzles. We all have one, and they're all relatively the same size and design. But, each of us has certain pieces that others might not have, and without sharing the needed information to acquire that piece, it's that much more difficult to truly complete our own.

[@vdub6343]

Check out Descartes’ Meditations on the First Philosophy (1 and 2 are the only relavent ones here) for his demon deceiver argument. As far as I can tell, pretty much every modern philosopher agrees that agrees that we can’t Truly know anything other than that there is a thing that thinks. But acting like “you” are literally the only thing that exists (not what Descartes claims, btw) is wildly impractical. Taking solipsism too seriously is a terrible way to go about things.

[@nedocromil]

"There is no spoon"

[@RibbitHopX]

nedocromil And the cake is a lie.

[@Rowlandi11]

nedocromil And don't worry about the vase

[@ekmad]

+nedocromil there are four lights!

[@lookingfortruth1930]

nedocromil This is so mind blowing! Could you give me all the details, books, or whatever you have that covers the main ideas of our reality and spoon?

[@koilamaoh4238]

So in theory " There is no us."

[@MarkoKraguljac]

In my opinion one of the best talks in a long time.

[@giomjava]

Yep

[@troydavis1]

this was the worst and most dangerous idea ever, a fallacy, total bunch of junk, dressed up in a nice sweet sauce, catering to your need to feel all powerful by believing there is no reality and we make it all up. Its about the worst idea and lie in the universe, and its totally arrogant and egocentric ! mind boggling how people gobble up any nonsense as long as its presented with sciency words. Use your BRAIN and dont let this snake oil salesman convince you there is no reality !!

[@MarkoKraguljac]

@@troydavis1 No, it caters to our deep sense that reality might not exactly be what ego stories make it to be. It encourages us to admit that we don't know. Admitting and embracing ignorance is the beginning of true curiosity, wisdom and finally sanity.

[@oiuyuioiuyuio]

@@troydavis1 Completely agree.

[@epsomvince5950]

@@troydavis1 very well said...!!!! 👍👍

[@bigtimevideo10]

I heard this concept as a child while listening to the elders reading the Hindu text - the Ramayana. It’s called MAYA. Took many years to begin to understand it. Thanks for shedding light.

[@starlordgg]

i was sure atleast one guy would their bring their religious agenda into this. "My book said this 1000+ years ago" type comments are everywhere. Yet, when you dig deep its just confirmation bias and seeing things that you want to see in those scriptures.

[@threestars2164]

Nonsense

[@hectorlp1298]

Great talk. He's actually elaborating Kant's epistemology. We create the "noumena" - the desktop - but he holds out hope that we can find out something about the unknown "dinfgen im sich" - things in themselves that lie behind the icons. He puts me in mind of Carlos Casteneda's description of the "reality" perceived when under the influence of hallucinogens - the ""nagual" of central American native culture.

[@jefferyrutherford1471]

WELCOME to The Matrix. You’ve lived here all your life.

[@user-vx9yp7ch3e]

jeffery Rutherford what the fck

[@veronicadiazdiaz1738]

@@user-vx9yp7ch3e well better yet live in a. Holography Universe of all possibilities.. So watch THOUGHTS.... Even better look up Karen Hudes better days to come -Golden Age...

[@user-vx9yp7ch3e]

@@veronicadiazdiaz1738 thanks will do

[@drjojo5551]

A matrix is just another comic book, just like the enterprise and co.

[@veronicadiazdiaz1738]

@@drjojo5551 pls look up Karen Hudes and laugh with us. (the Masses) all D way to the Banks... Lol comics and the Jettison and beyond... Love ur Thinking !! ..... Forget not ever !! True better than Fiction .. Love bye !!

[@debielesko9269]

I will be watching this again. One of the best TED Talks I have watched to date!

[@raftemmerman765]

I'm writing everything down and printing it. I have my folder with all my printed, interesting text from all kind of videos and webpages, totally recommend!

[@dakotawayne2065]

This was BRILLIANTLY done! Amazing, understandable, demonstrable, logical, well spoken, easy to conceptualize. Very good job sir!

[@jamesprice6015]

What is not with you?! 😡

[@troydavis1]

this was the worst and most dangerous idea ever, a fallacy, total bunch of junk, dressed up in a nice sweet sauce, catering to your need to feel all powerful by believing there is no reality and we make it all up. Its about the worst idea and lie in the universe, and its totally arrogant and egocentric ! mind boggling how people gobble up any nonsense as long as its presented with sciency words. Use your BRAIN and dont let this snake oil salesman convince you there is no reality !!

[@x-popone6817]

@@troydavis1 No, he is not saying we can just make stuff up. He is saying that our minds reconstruct information to create a perception. It is not an arrogant view, you are just misunderstanding it.

[@troydavis1]

@@x-popone6817 you are naive and deluded, hes not saying what youre saying, which is banal, trivial, and accepted science for hundreds of years ! So youre just fooling yourself and its you not listening to his words ! You remind me of religious fanatics defending the pentateuch/torah or quoran, saying. They dont really mean that vile stuff ! You mis understand! No Sir! Youre the deluded ‘useful idiot’ who excuses madness !!!

[@x-popone6817]

@@troydavis1 This comment of your has no substance. Just an incoherent, close-minded, rant

[@stuartboorman]

What I understand from this is that we have all evolved as humans to see reality in a similar way (albeit with some differences, for example some people are colour blind, yet they still see in the same way, just without colour). Its like he points to, if we saw the complexity of reality as it really was it would be too much information to take in. I too love that science is now starting to look in this direction.

[@kuuluna]

It probably shattered a lot of our beliefs and everything else

[@darkmatter6714]

He’s such a great guy. Mild mannered and zero ego

[@watherby29]

He spends hours sitting in silence in empty office doing nothing daily ;)

[@felonymelody4773]

@@watherby29 Do you know that or is it only in your imagination? ;)

[@sonnerlotus1]

@@felonymelody4773 Ive heard him say he meditates several hrs day

[@watherby29]

@@felonymelody4773 Yes, he said he sits in an empty room doing literally noting. Not "meditating" per definition, just sitting in silence for hours.

[@Soc-q7j]

@@felonymelody4773 he said it on theories of everything boss

[@galacticplastic1741]

"Our Minds only sees the fruit of a tree that we hardly know its roots"

[@Nanette_DeCardenas]

Best way to know reality is the Blind / Deaf man.

[@literalghost929]

@@Nanette_DeCardenas The only empty glass is the one that is full.

[@DanaTaylorSudo]

I think we may be one dimension short of being able to actually figure the universe out.

[@arielhernandez1638]

No. Even after we "figure out the Universe", it will still surprise us.

[@TS-hw7ro]

Ariel Hernandez yes since im sure there is more then “just” our universe to explore

[@Tate525]

@@TS-hw7ro yes realms & dimensions beyond us

[@Helios601]

@@arielhernandez1638 Especially if the universe is conscious of itself.

[@Nanette_DeCardenas]

Best way to know reality is the Blind / Deaf man.

[@unscrupulousyou]

A few yeaes ago i went through this phobia of certain shapes and geometric designs. My perception would construct these shapes and designs everywhere, objects i knew to be a certain way were entirely different. This went on for many months. I'm fine now. But sometimes i'll come across these objects or structures as they appear now and it absolutely baffles me how I once perceived them. In short, I know empirically that our minds are constructing our physical reality.

[@zackaryalder6717]

One of my favorite Ted talks to this day. Outstanding job! This really makes you think

[@AmAl-mk8yh]

Everybody is saying Kant this, Budda that, and they said this many years ago, and he is re-describing it now. Yes he isn't saying anything new HOWEVER, He is Scientifically trying to prove what they said. This is a breakthrough in science.

[@GornubiusFlux]

This changed my life for the better, yet I know less and less.

[@Ben_D.]

His teachings have completely changed my look on life. Since I discovered him, I have found others that teach similar things.

[@caitlynj7466]

This is what we need from our so called philosophers. Scientists should take this kind of thinkings more seriously. The general theory of relativity is simply the rule of the user interface while quantum physics is about the rules next level down.

[@pierrassic]

My reality interface is still using Windows 98... :(

[@Mortthemoose]

Lol....my reality interface is Windows 7

[@carynebio]

@@Mortthemoose At least is not Windows 8! That would be a mess!

[@firstnamelastname-xx3pe]

What is Windows? MS-DOS 6.0 serves me just fine!

[@TakingTheRedPill69]

At least its not Millennium 🤣

[@edgararens44]

16:36 "We are blind to our own blindnesses". Is there a hope to awake?

[@StycksOfficial]

Maybe if we can create something that can perceive on an elevated conscious level which can be translated to human perception.

[@edgararens44]

@@StycksOfficial Let’s do it

[@StycksOfficial]

@@edgararens44 I can promise you that I am not that guy haha

[@edgararens44]

@@StycksOfficial I experienced that, and day by day sitting on the grass and letting go every “what I know”, and just listening by all of my senses, just listening or observing everything, every aspect “I” could observe... It’s available to anyone but, after that will be dramatic change “to the rest of life”...

[@kennethholbert6468]

Too easy, be less human. Allow the physical body to die

[@_A4A]

I have always wondered if all the people I pass on the street, shopping in the mall, driving in the cars next to me and even the clouds in the sky existed to others around me or even at all. I have watched both children & pets eyes follow things in the room that I do not see and I have also witnessed my own dogs ears perk up when my ears would start to ring and have yet to understand the correlation of these said experiences. This particular TED has helped me line up many what if, why & hows and I'm truly hoping to one day see what I have been missing all along, even when it was right in front of me or maybe not all!...

[@aceventura5398]

I think this too. I've been saved from death to many times. I think we all have our own dimension and live to old age in it. But in other dimensions we die at varying ages. These personal dimensions allow for time travel and the Mandela effect. Opening portals allow one to cross over to another's dimension into another time.

[@mom_im_losing_it]

@@aceventura5398 I’m confused so how am I seeing

[@aceventura5398]

@@mom_im_losing_it my post to your * how am i seeing * isnt appearing on my screen. Did you receive it ?

[@gpligor]

In other words "The less you know the more happy you are" I see some scientific proof for this quote in current presentation ;)

[@alomaalber6514]

the phrase is "ignorance is bliss" but some wish to know.

[@arielhernandez1638]

"The less you know the more happy you are". I disagree. May I recommend book for you? "The 7 Habits of Highly Successful People". This timeless classic helped me change my life, so maybe it will help you too. Stop being depressed, and live.

[@jonathanmathenjwa974]

knowing more than society makes you sad while society is content in its ignorance

[@leonardellinsgaard8710]

it can also be fucking liberating

[@andyaim4764]

When I was young a stray cat got in my house.. I heard a noise.. was scared and looked over the bannister.. my brain painted a dwarf complete with boots running down the hall... I froze in fear... The next glance was I saw the stray cat.... I laughed in relief but for that fight or flight reflex my brain altered reality....

[@rogerlimoseth4790]

Ever think the dwarf transformed into a cat to protect itself?

[@ben2366]

We’re you with Joe Rogan doing that DMT?

[@martinsapsitis4292]

Touche Andy!

[@donniedonnie639]

reality is a projection of a more solid world behind the screen - sometimes it glitches

[@troydavis1]

NO, your brain did NOT alter reality! you see, this kind of careless statement is what this fake scientist wants you to believe, or how he wants you to think, in totally incorrect ways, which ASSUME what he is trying to prove! your brain filled in gaps in your comprehension of it with something more readily available in your brain, literally an image which was already "sitting" there (and had you been of another culture, it would have been another image....), and then corrected itself with the accurate image in a split second ! thats all ! it NEVER changed reality! this kind of sloppy thinking is what idiots like him promote, and its the worst thing in the world, because he teaches you NOT to be precise with words, but talk nonsense using the same false assumptions he makes.

[@jackvlach2153]

omg i thought i was going insane i straight up think about like all this everynight by myself

[@RickyPisano]

The double slit experiment was profound on many levels. Matter at a fundamental level behaves differently when observed. Now, what if the perception of reality every human senses was completely different....but the way we describe it to each other matches each of our individual perceptions? For instance, I see a red rose. The color and shape of it are how I perceive it. To another person the shape of the rose might be completely different and that persons red might be blue. Even though we are seeing completely different perceptions of rose, we describe it so that we agree it is perceived by both of us exactly the same. This being said, the world might be completely and utterly different for each of us in how it's perceived. Only our description of it causes us to believe that what we perceive as reality is the same for everyone.

[@align2source]

This is truly exciting! We are on the brink of a deeper understanding of reality and therefore our selves.

[@calb488]

wow

[@caroldelosangeles3621]

So excited too love to see people interested here Lets share

[@timothyhofman4260]

Uhm... this is rather very scary, because if I understood it correctly, than this means that having a more accurate understanding of reality decreases our likelyhood of survival. Which could mean more bluntly that: The development in science will eventually lead to our extinction. And if I look to the current state of our biosphere -on which we depend- in relation to the influence of our science based development in technology. Which resulted in following; like for example: climate change, loss in biodiversity, desertification, intoxification, nuclear threats et cetera. Then it seems at the least the start of proving this hypothesis.

[@align2source]

@@timothyhofman4260 I think you misunderstand this concept, Donald Hoffmans research reveals that our evolutionary sensory experience of reality is false. We can still expand our knowledge and understanding through real science to learn to know reality for what it is. Too learn to see through the "veil". And this is exactly what Donald Hoffmans "mission" is.

[@benjaminsmith6846]

George Berkeley and Kant. Exactly what came to mind while watching this.

[@pikiwiki]

"I refute it thus!" Johnson stubs toe

[@8brightside8]

Yes, Hoffman is not original.

[@wrinkleypinkley]

Which Kant work or principle?

[@neestovekin8251]

Indra's net is what comes to mind for me when he talks, though that was first prompted by one of his other vids (made for Institute of Art & Ideas)

[@germanboy5392]

TED becoming my favorite channel....great bedtime stuff

[@threestars2164]

An illusion is like a mirage that is later contradicted by another perception, the mirage does not come into existence, it was merely a false appearance. So the only way reality could be an illusion is if we all cognized another perception that cancels our universal experience that we call reality.

[@jenniexx9528]

Thank you for providing this video in this time of uncertainty and isolation. I believe that this is the best time to get to know the significance of one's existence and sense of self ... time to shine introverts!!!

[@irrelevant_noob]

Have you missed the info that this video is from Jun 2015? :-)

[@rejects101]

Ever since I was a child I always asked myself this question, I used to ask adults, what's outside of our eyes?

[@billpiechocki]

@oofafoo, nice. Deep. I like.

[@angelinarobert622]

That's similar to Elon Musk's question that he'd ask a Super Artificial Intelligence: "What's outside the simulation?" 🤔 Probably an alien playing Sims 8,000. on a Quantum PlayStation 5000. In any case it doesn't matter, we cannot escape the simulation. So if simulation theory is just a theory, simulation theory is popular among the wealthy because it justifies the exploitation of employees, "i don't have to give him a raise. He's just a simulation." yup, the wealthy who believe in simulation theory are sociopaths. 🤔Give peace a chance and give him a raise, Scrooge McDuck. ☮️

[@angelinarobert622]

Quantum Particles like photons are outside our eyes. -the smarty pants adult. 🖖😐☮️

[@angelinarobert622]

Quantum Particles like photons are outside our eyes. -the smarty pants adult. 🖖😐☮️

[@angelinarobert622]

Quantum Particles like photons are outside our eyes. -the smarty pants adult. 🖖😐☮️

[@grandydroid]

One of the best Ted Talks I've watched. I must have watched probably 100s of them.

[@perfectfutures]

Same here and I'd agree. The presentation wasn't unusually entertaining or original, yet the content is truly ground-breaking. By bringing desktop interfaces into a timeless search for the true nature of reality, he really got our attention.

[@troydavis1]

this was the worst and most dangerous idea ever, a fallacy, total bunch of junk, dressed up in a nice sweet sauce, catering to your need to feel all powerful by believing there is no reality and we make it all up. Its about the worst idea and lie in the universe, and its totally arrogant and egocentric ! mind boggling how people gobble up any nonsense as long as its presented with sciency words. Use your BRAIN and dont let this snake oil salesman convince you there is no reality !!

[@DerTomatenToaster]

@@troydavis1 Are you alright? Do you... need help?

[@JBSCORNERL8]

@@troydavis1 he never said there isn’t a reality. He said that the reality we see isn’t what it appears to be

[@troydavis1]

@@JBSCORNERL8 wrong, if thats all he said it would be utterly banal ! Its amazing how you delude yourself! You think like a religious fanatic :-(, its pretty horrifying in fact. Denying the very thing in front of your nose. Go see a shrink. No, that wont help probably. Not sure what would. Youre probably too set in your absurd « magical » worldview.

[@JamesHumecky]

I love this. Very succinct and in alignment with what I have felt for many years. “Perhaps reality is some vast, interacting network of conscious agents, simple and complex, that cause each others conscious experiences.”

[@ellysaf]

When I was under Anestesia in an operation room. I saw an empty dark room and when I asked what is reality. I was given an answer that everything is illusion, but there were lots of files with people’s actions recorded and stored in a huge office style cabinet with lots of drawers. That happened to me 18 years ago.

[@pianospeedrun]

you had seen matrix before the operation ?

[@DanteLikesRock]

Tell us more.

[@MadMallory]

Sounds like an NDE! So cool!

[@nvmffs]

The Akashic records.

[@thespringbreeze1141]

Can you tell us more about it?

[@koofejood]

Buddha said the same thing 2.5 thousand years ago. It is our mind making objects around us. Without a mind to collect those objects, all the things in existence are just differences in state of energy.

[@01assassinscreed63]

Buddha never said that it was his followers don't spread pseudoscience

[@Romanticvampyre6]

His voice intonation and register remind me of Stephen Hawking's voice.

[@HkLY45]

Haha I can no longer listen to him without hearing this.

[@erikm6785]

We are not perceiving the "literal thing". The true reality is reconstructed by our brain, encompassing not only vision but also touch, smell, and other senses. It's like we are living in the screen, and seeing the pixels on the screen as the "ultimate reality". While the ultimate reality is inside the computer case.

[@tunahelpa5433]

I like Donald Hoffman. In this talk he suggests an idea and demonstrates it through analogies. Proving it will be more difficult.

[@billlindsay4646]

Has anyone else learned this without anyone teaching them about it? I've been considering this possibility since I was much younger. Just curious if that is out of the ordinary as I have been told I am a very out of the box thinker.

[@paulriversred738]

Not my whole life but somewhere around 25ish I started seeing things differently thinking about things differently I started questioning everything and it has opened my eyes in a way I can't express.

[@maggiemargaret1412]

I'd say that about 2/3 the way in, things started going way over my head....but by the end I lost the conviction that I even had a head.

[@Neceros]

🎯 Key points for quick navigation: 00:12 *🧠 Explores the mystery of how brain activity relates to conscious experiences.* 01:14 *🤔 Suggests limited progress in understanding consciousness is due to a false assumption.* 02:15 *👁️ Questions if our perception reflects reality accurately.* 03:43 *📷 Explains that vision involves constructing perceptions rather than capturing objective reality.* 05:37 *🎨 Demonstrates how visual illusions show our brain constructs what we see.* 06:08 *🦠 Argues that perceptions are reconstructed accurately for survival based on evolutionary advantage.* 07:10 *🐞 Uses the jewel beetle example to illustrate how evolution favors adaptive perceptions over accurate ones.* 09:07 *🔍 Evolutionary simulations show that perceptions tuned solely to reality are less fit.* 12:01 *💻 Uses desktop interface metaphor to explain how perception hides reality to guide behavior.* 16:31 *🧩 Proposes that reality is fundamentally different from our perceptions, opening new avenues to understanding consciousness.* 17:28 *🌐 Introduces "conscious realism," suggesting consciousness is fundamental to reality.* 20:57 *📚 Differentiates perception from logic and mathematics, which may be shaped differently by evolution.* Made with HARPA AI

[@vedanta1019]

12:44 is a mind blowing conclusion

[@pranavkaushik8925]

After everything, if things go alright, science will reach the destination that vedanta reached eons ago

[@cpliao100]

I think this is a masterpiece regarding the understanding of reality, since it basically sums up all the key nuts and bolts ever emerged, mostly sporadically, from our millennium of cultures and exploratory discoveries in a cross-disciplinary manner. So many have attempted to decipher the holographic universe in varying ways, but none have come this far and deep. I will definitely give it two thumbs up.

[@dismalthoughts]

> I will definitely give it two thumbs up But... those cancel each other out 😢

[@vladark138]

One wise man once said that reality is not just stranger than we suppose, it is stranger than we CAN suppose :)

[@atomusbliss]

that was the reductionist par excellance Dawkins.

[@albertorasa6220]

David Hoffman is very good in his talking. Very much appreciated!

[@laurentelzingre6359]

The speech was brilliant, intuitive and the storytelling could easily lead to a bestseller. I Am a also a big fan of the Matrix but still... I don't think it was a necessary reference in such an inspiring speech. Great work TED, keep the good work !

[@marshallodom1388]

You are not who you think you are. You are what everyone else experiences as you. And not a single one of them is a like. And I think that's why it's important to be a positive force in other people's lives instead of always thinking about yourself.

[@fauxnaifmusic5708]

You are also experiencing ‘you’.

[@markallenbialik]

This guys voice sounds like Stephen Hawking's voice synth machine.

[@eugenedelacroix3082]

Mark Bialik I thought the same

[@nevarezjosel]

Eugene Delacroix Saaaaaaame

[@SuperBoinger]

THANK YOU. Glad to know I wasn't the only one. But hey, it could just be a glitch in the matrix.

[@Seris_]

Mark Bialik More like an EAS message

[@david4134]

Mark Bialik i know so weird.. His also got a bit of Microsoft sam in their aswell lol

[@vgtj7]

"It's hard for us, to let go of spacetime and object.." “… because we blind to our blindnesess” perfect presentation by Donald Hoffman, to explain this Hadist Qudsi : يَقُولُ اللهُ تَعَالَى: أَنَا عِنْدَ ظَنِّ عَبْدِي “God the Almighty said: I am as my servant (you) thinks I am “ “Tuhan berfirman: Aku adalah prasangka hambaku..” Muhammad (600) "Manunggaling kawulo - gusti", "You, are your own God" “You, are the creator of your own reality” Syech Siti Jenar, javanese scientist (1481) “I think therefore i’am” Rene Descartes (1637) “Do you really believe the moon is not there when you are not looking (believe) at it?“ Albert Einstein, the confused scientist towards quantum physics and reality (1921)

[@purecoach]

This is a great talk and it's great to hear these ideas and to hear about the research Hoffman is doing. As a student of Buddhism, I can't help feeling like science is only slowly catching up to what the Buddha introduced us to 2500 years ago. Well done, but I feel like we already know this. Do we really need all of these ideas so carefully spelled out by scientists to be able to accept them?

[@andrejkt2631]

There is value in exploration using science as vehicle. Its hard for me to say this to a fellow buddhist, but try to be more open minded. After all, this digital conversation is made possible by the application of scientific concepts, not spiritual ones. The knowledge that perception creates reality maybe an old one but how to prove that scientifically, to understand the mechanism, and, eventually to apply that knowledge to create something useful and practical, is something entirely new and exciting. Regarding Prof. Hoffman he does meditation and I bet he studies Buddhism, too. He has been interviewed by some spiritual minded people, you can look it up.

[@viadharmawheel]

True but go back further to the foundations of Hindu philosophy. Buddhism is just a subset of Hinduism. A lot to ponder there and none of it conflicts with this TED talk...

[@richardlitwin4046]

Dr Siddhartha Gautama Buddha lived in 1895-1950 and he ate mangoes for breakfast.

[@chicawhappa]

@UTubeFekUrself Very thoughtful question. Possibly we're about as real as a virtual avatar in a SIM game. Their eventual thoughts and perceptions due to developments in AI will be real for them, but in the larger "reality" be less substantial than the Moon's atmosphere. 😊 The same could be the case for us.

[@skamore_arts]

@UTubeFekUrself i agree ,it all ends that we are evolving.

[@justicewillprevail1106]

Very very good talk. Don Hoffman is def onto something for sure.

[@Mutation80]

We're experiencing an internal interpretation of just a tiny part of the raw reality outside ourselves

[@8brightside8]

Yep, and twenty-one minutes of Hoffman’s meticulous examples pretty useless.

[@greenbongos]

As a photographer and documentarian, I can't believe our eyes are 130 mega pixels. Other than everything else he said, this is really blowing my mind.

[@greenbongos]

@Farb S it’s an estimate

[@nmarbletoe8210]

130 interesting! also we have many layers of AI in between the retina and the brain. i have read that the eye can detect a single photon

[@byronsoto21]

Who else is here after watching him being interviewed by a person i will not name. Kept being cut off so I am here 🤗

[@MrAlvog]

Finally somebody explained my acid trip!

[@JohnDoe-hz9be]

Dmt on the other hand

[@michaldunk4]

@Caleb Fletcher Of course some lsd wouldnt make you next level smart, but lsd may be altering these "evolutionary hacks", at least letting you aknowledge them.

[@michaldunk4]

Donald Hoffman should definitely research some Albert Hoffman

[@trevdogbunkers1048]

Caleb Fletcher what about some dmt I’ve smoked a few times before

[@REDPUMPERNICKEL]

@Caleb Fletcher There are different kinds of veil. In my trip, between the fireworks, there was a segment of about an hour during which the veil of mundane normalcy was swept aside so that, one after another, I could for the first time clearly see the very structure of the profound absurdities abounding in my culture. As each new insight suddenly manifested, the shock made me burst into laughter in the way one does at a joke. Can't help but imagine that my chums, who were only drinking, must have worried that I had gone insane just like the crazed piano player in the anti drug propaganda film, Reefer Madness. My only regret is that I could not clearly remember those revelations and thereby avoid the pain that collision with those absurdities occasionally engenders.

[@cierratodd1691]

This needed to be so much longer each thought felt incomplete. Still a great start I would love to hear more in-depth thoughts from him on this theory.

[@jftvrwk]

his book is pretty good! "the case against reality"

[@lllpratlll]

He did lex fridman podcast 2 months ago, talks about this for 3 hours

[@laeioun]

"There's something that exists when you don't look but it isn't spacetime and physical objects." This is the most interesting statement that I have ever contemplated.

[@daletreece5933]

Great stuff! All good fodder for the interest in Consciousness. From my perspective, the bigger news from Donald's talk is how this POV of our perception of reality puts a unique spin on Evolution and Natural De-selection.

[@raymondbedborough8522]

Keeps things simple but worthwhile. Excellent presentation

[@muppist]

I wonder if it's Mr. Hoffman's evolution simulator that fails to reflect reality. That's a hypothesis he doesn't cover in his short talk. What fitness function(s) does he use? I would speculate that this is where the problem lies, more than that we don't see reality "as it is." It's obvious we don't see all of reality. We see a tiny sliver of the electromagnetic spectrum, and at a certain rate, for example. We see optical illusions and can be distracted to sometimes not see what's right in front of us. But I would argue that the part we do see is for the most part accurate. When I see a tomato sitting one meter in front of me, it's really there. It's not a beer bottle. It's not a cell phone. Someone might have put a very realistic plastic fake there, but by the time I pick it up and bite into it, I'll know if it was a tomato or not. Another idea I'll just throw out there is that if Mr. Hoffman's evolution simulator actually is an accurate reflection of how we understand evolution is supposed to work, since it doesn't work that way, perhaps our idea of how evolution works is incorrect. I've only read a smattering of the hundreds of comments, so appologies if someone's already said this.

[@PeterKoperdan]

"But I would argue that the part we do see is for the most part accurate." I think you didn't quite understand the main message. The tomato is the folder. It's red. If someone tells you to choose a red folder among many different folders, you can correctly choose a red folder. To that extend your perception is accurate. But not your perception of reality as such, just your perception of the symbol representing the folder-data - a picture of a red folder somewhere on the screen. The real folder is a string of ones and zeroes embedded in other strings of ones and zeroes representing the operating system. Those ones and zeroes correlate with electromagnetic states of the physical storage medium (simplifying extremely). And we can go further to the level of atoms, elementary particles and beyond. At each step there is a question: Is this the real reality or just a 'symbolic' representation of it? Tech savvy people understand, that the folder is just an icon representing data in some way. There is no real red folder hiding in your USB stick. However, some old people may interpret this operating system symbolism literally. They imagine that there is a literal red folder hiding somewhere inside their computer, possibly the LCD screen itself. Most people are like these old people when it comes to perception of general reality. We intuitively believe/feel/know that there is a red tomato in front of us. It is hard for us to perceive the tomato as a symbol of some deeper reality.

[@mykhailohohol8708]

@@PeterKoperdan Start of your comment was promising.. Neither did you apparently. He wasn't talking about interpretation or meaning of our created symbolism, but about faultiness of perception and its ability to keep us going. What is this about old people..? Your comment is both offensive and unfalsifiable.

[@havenotchosenyet]

@@mykhailohohol8708 basically the claim is that time and space are qualia too. We know intuitively that color qualia is not a true 'property' of reality, we interpret the information that comes in and this information is clustered as qualia in our minds. The claim is that time qualia and space qualia are similarly 'properties of our mind' and not of reality.

[@diablominero]

​@@PeterKoperdan When you pick the red tomato, you're picking the tomato that reflects red light. Red light is light with a wavelength in an agreed upon range. Light with that wavelength is definitely real because we can measure it with instruments that weren't developed by evolution, like spectrophotometers. The space you think contains a tomato provably contains reducing sugars, carotenoids, cellulose, acid, water, and glutamine -- you can measure this with instruments people built out of steel and glass. We can argue til the cows come home about whether the tomato is real or whether the tomato is an imaginary thing representing the chemicals you can actually measure. But the chemicals exist in a well-defined region of space and reflect red light, and if you're going to try to argue they're imaginary you're just being stupid

[@PeterKoperdan]

@@mykhailohohol8708 My comment tried to use examples to help you understand. It didn’t work and you even managed to get offended. That’s OK, many people seem to miss the essence of Hoffman’s message. In case you care, just go back to the original Hoffman’s desktop folder analogy and try to apply it to the tomato. That’s the basic level. Hoffman goes way beyond the perception of physical objects. He basically applies his theory to time-space itself, which would really upended the reality as we know it. However, first you need to really understand the folder analogy and the implications for tomatoes and other physical objects.

[@mullergyula4174]

15:05 Cube and train example. This is not a good comparison, it is like saying if you see objects in a picture than nothing is real.

[@BluncheonMeat]

Excellent talk. I suppose, to see reality as it truly is, is to remove all symbolic thinking. I'd imagine that everything would be a quivering mass of confusion. It's easy to see how this is evolutionarily disadvantageous.

[@ETBrooD]

BluncheonMeat It's not neccessary to remove symbolic thinking to see reality, that might actually be detrimental. What's needed is 1.) a larger grammar of symbols 2.) an improved sense for spotting connections and the lack thereof. In simpler words "widening the horizon".

[@holleey]

ETBrooD add as many symbols as you like, you will still just see symbols. symbols are our attempts to describe the real thing, but they will never be the real thing. we already trap ourselves when we compare symbols with the real thing, or worse, confuse symbols with the real thing. that's like comparing the act of singing with ... a horse.

[@philipripper1522]

Holly Lab When we only have access to symbols, only symbols matter. If we could toss them aside for "reality" that would be great, but so far as anyone can tell, that is impossible. So it's irrelevant.

[@holleey]

Philip Ripper I wouldn't say that we have only "access" to symbols. we interpret reality through symbols, but the symbols are mere abstractions / concepts with the purpose to try describing the multi-dimensional impression with which we associate them. a newborn baby that has yet to learn any of our symbol languages works differently. for it, there's no concept of separation and numeration. there's nothing like "this is a tree, and it is separate from the soil". it's all just one impression. now while our symbol languages surely have proven to be hugely helpful and have allowed us to communicate complex ideas, they bear a danger as well. the education most children receive somehow completely ignores the relationship between symbols and the real thing, making us very vulnerable to the fallacy of confusing the symbol with the real thing, and from that, dogmatic beliefs arise, which limit us in our ability to perceive reality.

[@ETBrooD]

Holly Lab Limitations are neccessary to survive. If your senses didn't have strong filters, you'd be overwhelmed by the information. It'd all be a big blur, your grasp of reality would be worse because of weak filters. More information doesn't directly translate to greater understanding. Often times it actually hinders the learning process.

[@lasonn4127]

This is Kant.

[@samseau4]

Boom. Waiting to see if anyone would recognize the distinction between our perceptions and the noumena. But it's Kant with evolutionary theory on top - our perceptions of reality have evolved to maximize fitness, and not necessarily give us accurate info. It's actually a very reasonable theory and would explain why our perceptions of the thing-in-itself are not accurate (see: quantum physics). Overall it's not extremely groundbreaking but it is a smart synthesis of the best biological and epistemological theories available today (Kant + Darwin).

[@javierfernandez1126]

It is amazing to see how he treats the problem as something "innovative" if all western philosophy has tried to precisely make sense of the external world. Descartes, Kant, Spinoza, Hume, Husserl and the brigthest minds in the history of human society have tried to solve that and noted a lot of problems with the exposition that this guy makes (if reality is flawed as he says it is, how can you use evolution to prove it if evolution comes from the same sense that your are trying to prove are flawed in the first place). The guy could do better than that by searching through the history of tought.

[@totti2977]

All true, but he has the scientific method on his side. And his theorem, if it turns out to be scientificaly true, could lead humanity in a new direction whereas Kant and the philosophers did not have the tools to explore or push the matter even further. So in other words he beats them all by mixing philosophy with sciences

[@zarkoff45]

The only new tools we really have are Artificial Intelligence, Artificial Evolution, and Neuroscience. Perhaps quantum mechnics, but that only illustrates how deep the problem goes without really supplying a solution.

[@javierfernandez1126]

Tony El Hajj Crearly not, he cannot escape solipsism by using the "scientific method" you are naming(which in this case basically it is the theory of evolution). If the senses are flawed how come is he relying on an observation by Charles Darwin to make his case.

[@banzy3]

You call it a problem, as though it were something to be solved or conquered. I prefer the mystery, and hope it always remains so. You can dissect a person and learn a lot about their anatomy, but you're no closer to knowing the person. Reality beyond the smokescreen is probably more bizarre than even the most creative mind could possibly imagine.

[@Natu776]

I once told a friend who had "moved to Sydney", that I was was coming to visit in two days, so they better get busy building or unpacking it from boxes or whatever it is "they" do when I explore a new area. I must admit they did a pretty good job.