Are We Seeing Reality As It Is?
Efforts to understand the principles of the human mind and consciousness are ongoing. Particularly, philosophers of mind, neuroscientists, computer scientists, mathematical biologists, and cognitive scientists have been developing various theories through rigorous discussions. Among them, the following five theories stand out (though there are many more).
- (1) Global Neuronal Workspace Theory; GWT
- (2) Integrated Information Theory; IIT
- (3) Higher-Order Thought Theory; HOT
- (4) Free Energy Principle; FEP
- (5) Interface Theory of Perception; ITP
The contents of theories 1~4 are well-known and have been studied through various resources. Theory 5, however, came to my attention recently through a TED talk, and I found it incredibly impressive. This is because it is closely related to a field I am interested in—hypnosis—and shares some perspectives with the FEP. The ITP, proposed by Donald Hoffman, a professor of cognitive science at UC Irvine, argues that human perception and conscious experience are akin to a computer’s graphical user interface (GUI).
The research details are as follows. Utilizing evolutionary game theory, the study compares (1) perceiving the world as it is vs (2) perceiving it in a way that is advantageous for survival[1]. The results suggest that the latter scenario is more likely to enhance survival. This implies that the world we experience may not be the veridical (truthful) reality, but rather something reconstructed to hide that truth.
Isn’t this a bit unsettling? The world I experience presents its shapes, textures, colors, tastes, and scents so naturally. To think that these perceptions are evolved, inherited, and beneficial for survival… it reminds me of the Free Energy Principle (FEP), which views human perception as a Bayesian inference process.
In a column published in Science in 2019[2], the argument becomes even more striking. Hoffman asserts that our perception has evolved not only to focus on survival-related values but also that our sensory experience is a virtual world in itself. The objects or concepts we experience are merely structural features of data, far from their objective truth. Could it be that the world we experience is no different from a scene in a video game like GTA?
Considering the evolutionary aspect, this claim is reminiscent of the measurement problem in physics. To observe the properties of a physical system, a barometer that can measure it is required. Since measurement involves interaction, observing a highly uncertain or very small world can significantly disturb the subject being measured. This sets a fundamental limit on what we can know about the subject. At this point, this limit is more an epistemic limitation of the measurement process itself rather than an objective property of the subject (QBism reference).
If our perception and conscious experience are indeed barometers showing only fragments of the world, the concept of spacetime, which is usually assumed in physicalism, may lose its significance. In a recent lengthy paper, Hoffman argues that spacetime is doomed, alongside two other arguments[3]. If spacetime is not an objective property of the universe but rather a mode of our perceptual process, we may need to reconsider the theories we have developed thus far.
Questions about human perception and consciousness shake the foundations of our world. Sometimes, the conclusions drawn from studies of humanity throw all that we take for granted into the air, leaving us to catch it as it falls. This shock, however, helps us understand ourselves and others, making these questions irresistible and the resulting thoughts and ideas utterly captivating.
Reference
[2] Hoffman, D. D. (2019). Do we see reality? New Scientist.
[3] Hoffman, D. D., Prakash, C., & Prentner, R. (2023). Fusions of Consciousness. Entropy, 25(1), 129.
Comments