Do we see reality as it is? | Donald Hoffman | TED
Why Hacker News recommends it
Cited in discussions of perception, consciousness and what is real, though some commenters find his conclusions hand-wavy.
What it is
Cognitive scientist Donald Hoffman argues in this TED talk that evolution shaped perception to track fitness rather than truth. He uses evolutionary simulations and the Australian jewel beetle as examples.
Recommended by 3 HN commenters across 3 different months, 2016 to 2024.
What Hacker News said
Strong rec patcon · 2019-10 · on “Depressed People See the World More Realistically (2017)”
This reminds me of this amazing TED Talk: Do we see reality as it is? (Donald Hoffman, cognitive scientist) [this video] The intellectual bomb in the video is this: Organisms that perceive only "fitness" drive to extinction all organisms that perceive reality as it is. (in model systems simulating environments and creatures navigating them) My take: at every level, it would seem, perceiving true reality is not favoured. Nevermind cognitive biases, that's just one level. Literally the fabric of the universe: spacetime, matter, language, etc. It means nothing that it might feel comfortable or intuitive -- we should question it all.
Recommends wh-uws · 2016-10 · on “Image Synthesis from Yahoo's open_nsfw”
This is basically the exact hypothesis of a TED talk I saw by cognitive scientist Donald Hoffman. [this video] fascinating stuff
Recommends cartoonworld · 2021-06 · on “Ask HN: Words of encouragement for someone lost in life?”
This is extremely relatable and true. Thank you. The Tinder game is so horrible, 5% of the women get the attention of 80% of the men or more, leaving both the men and women in the other group feeling like there is something wrong with them. People feel the need to edit themselves in order to fit the false narrative created by these gamified dating scenarios, or else experience the fear of dying alone . There is nothing wrong with you. Our complicated, 3-dimensional, deep , personalities and lives are not meant to be reduced to a catalog, best consumed on the toilet, dismissed or accepted instantly based upon a false presentation designed to harness the evolutionary biology of actual living b
Cites psyc · 2017-03 · on “Is Consciousness an Illusion?”
The user-illusion metaphor is a central idea in Donald Hoffman's work. I'm not sure who borrowed it from whom. [this video]
Cites tibbydudeza · 2024-02 · on “Hallucination is inevitable: An innate limitation of large language models”
The brain fakes it to approximate reality - more so for reasons of the limitations of the wetware it runs on than anything else. For others here is a TED talk. [this video]
Cites patcon · 2024-12 · on “GPT-5 is behind schedule”
There's something here that I feel is pretty deep, though offensive for some minds: What is the actual consequence of being wrong? Of not getting right the base reality of a situation? Usually, stasis is the enemy that is much great than false information. If people with 90% truth can take a step forward in the world, even if they mistakenly think they have 100% truth, what does it matter? They're learning more and acting more for that step taken. If the mistaken ground truth is false and importantly enough false, they'll learn it bc their experience is grounded in the reality the navigate anyhow. If they don't learn it, it's of no consequence. This is on my mind because I work in democratic
Critical copperx · 2021-06 · on “Ask HN: Words of encouragement for someone lost in life?”
> [0] - [this video] While most of the talk is great, he just handwaves the idea that reality is not "brains and neurons," nor what physicists try to model, but he makes no effort in explaining what's the difference between "reality" and "physics." It would be great if someone who understood that last part could explain it.