Donald Hoffman on what reality is

34 thoughts on “Donald Hoffman on what reality is”

1. Why wouldn't our 'sense-of-ourselves' be included in what we 'construct' when we 'open our eyes'? Am I naive to think that any talk of 'construction' would, of necessity, include all of time, space and causality? I think not.

2. Would appreciate any smarty pants helping me out. Maybe I have lost my way in understanding the concept here but I have two questions…..1. If we reconstruct what we see in our brains when we open our eyes then why is it when we have our eyes closed and have a bright light Infront of our face do we see an orange coloured hue? Maybe because of the light travelling through our skin/blood etc but surely that would need to be known by the brain for it to perceive a certain colour. 2. In his TED talk he refers to the beetles that almost went extinct for trying to hump a brown dimpled beer bottle instead of a willing female mate, and then goes on to say it is hacks such as these which are condusive to survival from an evolutionary perspective, yet if it wasn't for humans changing the colour of the bottle then surely the beetles would have gone extinct anyway, so logically speaking or at least to me it seems that the hack in this case is not condusive to survival and seeing reality as it is would have been?

3. Creative Commons Media should apologize to Dr. Donald Hoffman for such a grotesque way of interviewing him. I will never again click on this channel.

4. Thumbs up if you got absolutely pissed off with this interviewer.

5. This interviewer is a fucking stupidass, for sure!

6. Yeah screw that interviewer.. Your recommendation to watch the video with these stupid headphones just to actually hear his nonsense is ridiculous. Interesting topic though..

7. He is definitely smart and I buy half of his hypothesis

8. Most stupid argument by Donald Hoffman. Not everything perceived is to keep alive and fitness function. Human lives for the greater purpose than to live. This is going crazy to preserve darwins stupid theory. Donal Hoffman is not listening to himself, who is trying to create the reality by forcing his argument of evolution.Its  like arguing with part of himself and using parts of others to come with a super conclusion. Donald anxious to reach conclusions.

9. The interviewer is not only rude but also plain dense. Producer get that guy away from interviewing scientists and if the interviewer is the producer he should resign for the sake of this channel.
   Some interesting points by Donald Hoffman, food for thought and discussion.

10. We are still inventing the words to describe what is happening in the Univers. But I think he's using the wrong word here. He keeps saying that we are "creating" what we see. Now any gamer will tell you that your video card isn't "creating" anything. It's RENDERING it. It's all still there in the program, but we don't need to "see" what isn't specific to near environment. I sure wish people would stop using words hijact by religion and metaphisics.

11. There's no such thing as a "true colour" colour, like reality, doesn't really exist! its just a perception.

12. Wow, the Interviewer is a tool

13. In other words, Donald is saying that we are living in a virtual reality made of consciousness.

14. how do we get a mathematical equation of consciousness, when consciousness seems to be something that is just floating around in the either not tied down to anything

15. so what is disturbing to me on t he surface, do we have a natural instinct to explore? Since we don't see reality as it really is why even bother trying to explore the universe? If there is a real agent behind what we take to be our reality, isn't he saying things like." Aww, isn't that cute…They're trying to build little rockets to go to other planets "…I would think part of going to other planets is to find out more about reality, to find maybe other life. But that doesn't seem to bring us any closer to reality because that is just more icons on our desktop. So what would be the point?

16. so if you create your world when you open your eyes what is happening when your eyes are shut? The world is still there

17. I'm 4 mins in and can't go on due to the agonizing interviewer. Don in the middle of a great point and the interviewer interupts "BUT IS THIS TRUE?". "BUT IS THIS YOUR IDEA OR SOMEONE ELSES?" lolwut

18. Hoffman reminds me of David Bohm

19. So let me understand this, the perception of reality is a series of avatars, so to speak that denote reality insofar as it is necessary for the continuation of the survival of the organism.

20. Because Hoffman is a scientist, I wonder if what he explains is what we already know… for example, when he says we "create" what we see, he means that we process what is 'out there' in our field of vision, process that info like a computer does within the brain which renders what the eyes perceive and therefore we have vision, or sight. Scientists often leave out the most common detail or explanation. I wonder if this is purposeful or if they just don't understand how to relate to others so they riff on words and geeky stuff without knowing how to care or understand of the listener's understanding. This is to say- we already know and understand this. No need to complicate it.

21. your reality is an illusion because Donald Hoffman said so. Donald Hoffman is an illusion

22. He seems like a really nice guy We need more scientists like him in this world.

23. This proves my theory that this world is not of right and wrong…of fact and truth because we really do not know what is true except from our own visual interpretation and self cognitions. In turn, this leads to a basic understanding that this world is of action and consequence.

24. How does it feel to know the life you thought was so real was actually a simulation created by the brain? Oh, you experienced it like a dream, but all of the properties like light, color, sound, form, space were all put there by the brain. I also find it interesting that no one ever mentions that if this is true, and I believe it is, that we only experience the world inside our brain then the world and the universe itself must be really small since it only arises in a small area of the brain. And every scientist is imprisoned to this same law. No one can step outside their mind and prove otherwise. Nietzsche did warn us when he said, ' Do not destroy people's illusions they cannot live without them.'

25. Got damn it, I don’t know if I am just in a bad mood, or if that interviewer is really that annoying, can’t put myself through this video any longer. But I love what the content otherwise.

26. Really made me upset how much the interviewer interrupts. Kills the interview

27. Google Tom Campbell, physicist, he also have concluded, logically (not believing), that we are perceiving a representation of reality, not reality itself. He's done a brilliant work, as Donald Hoffman has, brilliant!

28. Why does the video seem to cut off short at 48:41, Mr. Hoffman is right in the middle of explaining the relationship between evolutionary psychology and how the perception of reality is constructed? Is there a part II not posted yet?

29. Donald ' I'm going the other way' Hoffman, you rock buddy!

30. The Logical Rule being discussed here is: Modus Ponens.
    In Kabbalah it is referred to as the language of: Roots & Branches.
    The Hypostatisation of Nominalism is here being exposed as Fraudulent.
    According to Lacan:
    Impossibility(Absence, Fraud)
    Nomen are predicated as perceptual, yet are in fact abstractions. This exposes the fallacy of Nominalism.
    Nomen are self-contradictory, unless we stop conflating Map with Territory: "The Map is not the Territory" Alfred Korzybski.

31. Man, Hoffman is quite the original thinker.

32. Why do people seem so fascinated and responsive to theories like this apparently more than to a more conventional naive realist approach?

33. This man is brilliant. A true visionary.

    Very unusual to see a scientist who percieves that the 3-D world (& it’s language/ concepts available in 21st century Earth) are not sufficient to form a true theory of the true nature of “reality.”

    And he’s eloquent and full of grace in spite of this line of questioning.

    One may conclude that man is just a “carbon-based machine” if he bases his concept of himself on his biological body alone. By doing that, he ignores the obvious: consciousness. Like sitting in a cave contemplating shadows on the wall & mistaking that for “life.” (Thanks Plato.)

    I cannot wait to see the future contributions of Donald Hoffman! I’ll be rooting for you!
    (Perhaps proving the fundamental nature of consciousness mathematically, and who knows what else?)

    I like the idea about a 4th -10th color receptor – (man only has 3) … Trying to imagine a new color – good analogy.

    How can we imagine a 4-D world and then imagine the physics to define not just our 3-D world, but the true nature of reality?

    What if we could do more than imagine a 4-D world – and actually experience it? What if the concept of mind was central in that world? That would mean that THOUGHT would become our interface. What if you could access other dimensions too? Where could that lead? (If the mind can concieve it, it can achieve it.)

    Could lead to so much more than e=mc2, which has left so many questions unanswered. Maybe a unified field theory. That will get you the Pulitzer prize. But there is so much more to life than fortune and fame. I suspect you will find what you’re looking for – and that your journey will be amazing.

    I love the way u answered the question about if the 2 of u existed in the same world – “it’s more about the things we’ve spent our time thinking about.” Such a gentleman, so eloquent, kind, and articulate. We are fortunate to have a scientist like him with so much knowledge in other areas – who’s ego isn’t too inflated to talk to people with all levels of understanding.

    Interviewer: LET HIM TALK WITHOUT INTERRUPTION! But thanks for posting!

34. the car and the cliff are as real as you are.

Comments are closed.