I'd like to know Soylentils' takes on the following Sci-Fi thought experiment:
In the near future, scientists create a safe, non-invasive, and irreversible procedure that causes a person to perceive reality without any human biases. It is offered to the general public at no cost and takes 15 minutes with no convalescence time or physical restrictions. The effects take hold gradually over the course of 24 hours and are thereafter permanent.
Would you do it?
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Ask the Community: Sci Fi Thought Experiment
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 106 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
2
(1)
2
(Score: 5, Insightful) by FatPhil on Monday November 15 2021, @12:23PM (7 children)
Death would be cheaper, quicker, and probably more pleasurable. Anyone selecting 'yes' should be offered that as the alternative, and strongly encouraged to take it.
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 15 2021, @12:55PM
(Score: 3, Informative) by choose another one on Monday November 15 2021, @01:25PM (2 children)
Came here to say pretty much exactly the same.
Would add that without our human "bias" death will surely follow pretty damned quickly on return to reality anyway.
"ooh, big cuddly bear thing, I wonder if it will be my friend..."
"ooh, lots of wet stuff, I wonder whats underneath it..."
"big trucks are really noisy, they sound fun, i wonder if they want to play?..."
etc.
(Score: 3, Funny) by pkrasimirov on Monday November 15 2021, @01:36PM (1 child)
"really noisy, they sound fun" -- that's pretty biased already
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday November 15 2021, @02:52PM
But not a human bias. It checks the boxes off.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 15 2021, @08:31PM (2 children)
This is an argument for smoking and drinking. The best sci-fi writers were chainsmokers and drunks. They'd sit back in their squeaky chairs and think... and take a sip. And eventually puffs of gossamer doughnuts would rise in the stagnant air, as if issued from the Vatican itself. All the pieces would start fitting together, and then the writer would come up with a dozen scenarios about why safe and non-invasive procedures are required to have plot twists. And then there would be a great storyline, and another storyline they rejected, and then the writer would die young... at least their braincells and lungs would.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 17 2021, @12:01AM (1 child)
Not really, the writers generally accepted as being the best were mostly around long enough ago that such actions were more socially acceptable. If that remains the case even as people stop drinking and smoking, you may have a point.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 17 2021, @05:04PM
For me, I think it's more about the squeaky chair. Same effect, though. Lean back. The scenario plays out through multiple paths, you ponder conditionals, perspective, motivations... discard the thin, obvious and hackneyed. Mostly, you don't post the barest improbable inkling on some web site, and hope others will do your imaginin' for you. That was my original veiled point... I was too subtle.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by coolgopher on Monday November 15 2021, @12:24PM (4 children)
What do you mean when you say "without any human biases"? Lack of emotion and desires? Or full sensory input across the spectrum of things (EM, gravitational, molecular, what-have-you)? I guess either way I would not do it, not without first augmenting my ol' biological brain in some manner to cope with such a change. It's a fragile setup as-is, a rapid change would be far too likely to topple it.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by JoeMerchant on Monday November 15 2021, @02:06PM (3 children)
Sounds like a slow acting lobotomy to me. Without bias, there is only indecision. Any humans "seeing all sides" of a situation equally won't be human anymore, and in fact would need super-human abilities to realize a true "lack of human bias." I presume the lack of bias also means the lack of ability to act based on bias, otherwise... did anything really change?
If the modified act based on their limited (human) perceptions of non-bias, then they become 100% predictable based on the information they are fed, and thereby 100% controllable in that way. Doesn't sound like a recipe for positive change in this world.
Anybody remember Serenity?
Україна досі не є частиною Росії Слава Україні🌻 https://news.stanford.edu/2023/02/17/will-russia-ukraine-war-end
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 15 2021, @02:24PM (1 child)
(Score: 3, Interesting) by JoeMerchant on Monday November 15 2021, @05:27PM
I know several oldies who were real jerks in their younger years who became wonderfully cooperative (most of the time) after they lost most sense of who they were, where they were, what they thought they were trying to do a minute ago...
Unfortunately, for every one of those, I also know two more who were relatively polite / nice in younger life and that kind of fell apart along with their memories.
Україна досі не є частиною Росії Слава Україні🌻 https://news.stanford.edu/2023/02/17/will-russia-ukraine-war-end
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 16 2021, @09:29PM
A newborn baby has biases. I'm sure you could poke 'em while still in the womb, and some would like it, while others wouldn't. Roll 'em back farther, and... you're a Catholic the moment dad came. Unless dad was too much of this or not enough of that...
We still need better smokin', drinkin', thinkin' sci-fi writers.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 15 2021, @12:26PM
exactly what would be left without them?
too many [wikipedia.org] to say yes to _all_ so the answer would be no thanks.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by ealbers on Monday November 15 2021, @12:43PM (2 children)
First you need to understand what 'bias' means
From Webster:
a : an inclination of temperament or outlook especially : a personal and sometimes unreasoned judgment : prejudice
b : an instance of such prejudice
c : bent, tendency
d(1) : deviation of the expected value of a statistical estimate from the quantity it estimates
(2) : systematic error introduced into sampling or testing by selecting or encouraging one outcome or answer over others
So, create a procedure which allows people to switch between having their human biases and not having them so they can compare, then yep.
Some of my 'unreasoned judgements' are intentional and based on experience and are very useful....some are not
So, No, unless I could switch between having and not having and by doing so determine if the bias is one I want to keep.
(Score: 2) by coolgopher on Monday November 15 2021, @09:59PM
Thank you for your comment, but it so does not address the lack of clarity. My decision making is heavily biased by what I can actually perceive, which is limited by my senses. One way to look at removing the human bias would be to vastly expand our sensory input so as to perceive a more complete version of reality. And that would need a vastly upsized neocortex to handle.
You're spot on about the value of being able to compare with/without bias.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 17 2021, @06:35AM
So a mindless, opinion-free, 1984 dystopia. Nuke it from orbit.
Now, comrade, we have detected a deviation from the unbias in you. Social Score -3,000. Come along..
(Score: 4, Informative) by EJ on Monday November 15 2021, @12:53PM (4 children)
It was called Equilibrium, and it basically showed that your idea is stupid.
No one should want to become an emotionless robot.
(Score: 1) by aebonyne on Monday November 15 2021, @06:22PM (3 children)
The question actually reminded me of Ted Chiang's Liking What You See: A Documentary [wikipedia.org] where there's a safe, reversible procedure for disabling/enabling your brain's ability to perceive whether a face is attractive, a science-fictional extension of the known type of brain damage where a person can see faces just fine but can't recognize them. It's just one type of bias, but it seems similar to what sgleysti is asking for. The story is written in the documentary style of a bunch of people with different viewpoint just talking to the camera about the debate over this procedure, and it does a fairly good job of not taking sides.
Centralization breaks the internet.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday November 15 2021, @07:19PM (1 child)
Presumably, inability to judge attractiveness of a face comes with loss of many related abilities...
Even if it were just limited to judging attractiveness of a face, that would presumably lead to lack of critical decision making regarding procreation, and asymmetrical, deformed and otherwise diseased face people would have more children - probably leading to less happiness and contentment in the world overall, at least in the long run. Although, Downs' Syndrome people do generally seem to be happy, pleasant to be around, and generally content with their lot in life - even when the world around them treats them poorly - so, maybe there are some positive outcomes along those lines...
Україна досі не є частиною Росії Слава Україні🌻 https://news.stanford.edu/2023/02/17/will-russia-ukraine-war-end
(Score: 1) by aebonyne on Monday November 15 2021, @07:41PM
For the purposes of the story, there's a magical, perfectly targeted procedure that only affects the ability to judge attractiveness without any side effects because Ted Chiang wants to talk about the halo effect [wikipedia.org] of physical attractiveness and not about breeding or genetics. There is, of course, discussion of dating based on looks vs. personality, but I don't recall any discussion of that resulting in genetic inferior children (except maybe that they may be less pretty?).
Centralization breaks the internet.
(Score: 2) by sgleysti on Tuesday November 16 2021, @05:03AM
Yep, along those lines. I do appreciate that short story. Still have to finish the anthology it's in...
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 15 2021, @12:56PM
Our biases are shortcuts allowing us to come to decisions without having to rethink situations every time a variable changes. Without them we're doomed to overthink every situation. Life is too short for that sort of Sheldon Cooper stupidity.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by looorg on Monday November 15 2021, @01:06PM
No. I'm not quite sure what this perception filter of non human bias would look like or be like so I'm inclined to go with a no on this offer. If you alter human perception doesn't that also then alter your view, or experience of what is, reality?
Since I am not big on surprises I don't think I would like this one bit. Also as the procedure is apparently irreversible I'm even less inclined to go along with it cause I might not at all like the outcome of said procedure and I would then be stuck with it. Better to have what you have then play around and be stuck with something you don't want but can't get rid off.
That said if they can alter how you perceive reality I'm not sure why they couldn't just install some filter of what you like, not sure why everyone would want the same one. But then I guess if everyone didn't get the same one it would be pointless since then it wouldn't really be much or any difference from before. I assume the point here is to get everyone on the same page for some reason.
Another question then is how will this effect the rest of your human machine, but since it is stated to be "safe" I guess we can just not think about those things. I guess there is no risk then of a lot of people basically going insane due to it.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by pkrasimirov on Monday November 15 2021, @01:12PM (4 children)
Keep in mind becoming a bias-less being will alienate you from all others, so forever alone. Probably will have frustrations too trying to explain simple things to the biased people. And witnessing horrible consequences due to easily avoidable but unavoided causes and probably feeling helpless about it.
On the social aspect -- do others know you are now an oracle? Do they know for a fact that and can count on you, say, for being a judge or at least a forensics analyst? Perhaps some people will be biased at you for being too truthful and will be meant as if that's a bad thing.
Are mind-protection mechanisms a bias, like ignoring the fact that we can die at any time for a myrriad of reasons? Can a sane mind deal with that constant threat all the time but focus on daily life as usual? What about our insignificance in the whole Universe, is that a bias?
What about love and empathy? If I know exactly how and why someone got hurt and it's clearly thier fault, I mean within their realm of control, would I still feel for them or just know if for a fact and that's that?
Would I know good from bad? What is good if there is no bias, good for whom? What is chaos for the fly is normal for the spider. I surely will know rational and optimal but when there is no polarity, no direction, then increasing the velocity is useless.
====
TL;DR: I will probably pass. Not because I don't want the truth but because I don't want to be alone.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday November 15 2021, @05:21PM
But, eliminating human bias would mean that you just didn't care either way about horrible consequences. "Horrible" is a human bias, in and of itself.
Feelings are human, so eliminating human bias would likely leave you with no feelings. So, no, you probably couldn't care either way about people around you being maimed, mutilated, and killed, by whatever cause.
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 15 2021, @09:19PM
Which describes the SN comments sections perfectly.
(Score: 3, Informative) by sgleysti on Tuesday November 16 2021, @01:15AM
pkrasimirov interprets the thought experiment in the sense that I meant it. I was too vague, and meant primarily cognitive biases [wikipedia.org] as well as common prejudices like tribalism, etc.
appreciate all the replies though.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 16 2021, @02:24AM
Cassandra [wikipedia.org] comes to mind.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Ingar on Monday November 15 2021, @01:23PM
I don't want to be human! I want to see gamma rays! I want to hear X-rays! And I want to - I want to smell dark matter! Do you see the absurdity of what I am? I can't even express these things properly because I have to - I have to conceptualize complex ideas in this stupid limiting spoken language! But I know I want to reach out with something other than these prehensile paws! And feel the wind of a supernova flowing over me! I'm a machine! And I can know much more! I can experience so much more. But I'm trapped in this absurd body! And why? Because my five creators thought that God wanted it that way!
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 15 2021, @01:25PM
I am inclined to say yes if all we are talking about is "perception" of reality in the "senses" meaning of the word. My main problem is that is a difficult thing to comprehend the meaning of. "Bias" in our perception is most likely a necessary thing for our senses to function properly. Most likely the effect of this safe and non-invasive procedure would be highly problematic. Bias is a feature not a bug.
In any case I'd definitely let some other more risk taking individuals go first before making any judgement on whether or not I would go for it.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 15 2021, @01:25PM (6 children)
Does the procedure to remove "all human bias" produce someone with the biases of the author for what "no bias" looks like?
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 15 2021, @02:19PM (5 children)
Same with the other "usual suspects", who experience has shown are quite happy to lie and misrepresent things to "win the argument."
One thing they all have in common is a lack of any sort of substantial job history in the last few decades. They spent their time trolling the internets (see fusty the clowns posting history on the green site as an example, or APK anywhere).
So I'm biased against anything they put forth as probably going to be the same old shit, because that's literally all they have to give any sense of significance to their meagre existence. They can't draw from their own personal experience, for example, to make a point, because there is nothing much there among the hard-core parasitic lives. They argue because that's all they have. They can't get satisfaction from a job well done, or contributing to the greater good.
Many of us have run into similar people, and we've learned to take everything they say with a grain of salt. Because liars lie, even when it's "not necessarily." It's a sign of immaturity.
Ever run into a boss who lies all the time? wanted to tell them to grow the fuck up and stop being a manipulative prick because you can see right through them? It's a very satisfying experience, but you've got to be secure in the knowledge that (1) you're more essential than they are, and (2) you've got the dirt to back it up.
The ability to recognize these things quickly is because we build up biases, based on our experience, that trigger our baloney detectors. Without those biases we'd have to evaluate every scam, spam, and statement entirely on its own merits. But hey, maybe this time there really is a nigerian prince who wants to give you millions of dollars , and that really is Microsoft support calling you to help you remove a virus that they can see right now on your computer (even though it's turned off) or the IRS is calling to say that an arrest warrant has been issued because a package was seized by customs.
I'll stick with experience-derived biases.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday November 15 2021, @03:04PM (4 children)
Why would a substantial job history be valuable to our discussions here? Why would someone want a substantial job history? (That's a lot of work, right?) Who vets said job history? Should I be posting my resume so that I can continue to post on SN?
I post here because it's fun and often gains me interesting insights. I don't have said "substantial job history" because it's none of your business.
Where's said dirt here that backs up your post?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 15 2021, @10:00PM (1 child)
So kahllow does have a bot that notes whenever his id comes up on S/N.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by khallow on Monday November 15 2021, @10:18PM
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 16 2021, @01:03AM (1 child)
As for the supposed ad hominem, attacking your propensity to lie and argue dishonestly just for the sake of argument, well, truth hurts, don't it. Or are you going to make the delusional claim that people don't think you're just a lame lying troll? Despite continually being caught lying?
It's not like you haven't said the only value to a discussion forum is to argue.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday December 08 2021, @03:33PM
I see no actual documentation of my alleged continual lies. The ad hominem label continues to stick.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 15 2021, @01:40PM
You mean, for example, the fact that there was never any "Russian Collusion" by the Trump campaign? https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/maybe-it-s-time-the-washington-post-and-the-new-york-times-return-those-russian-collusion-pulitzers/ar-AAQmVIM [msn.com]
(Go ahead, downvote me. You're just proving my point.)
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Phoenix666 on Monday November 15 2021, @01:56PM (3 children)
If I surmise correctly, the purpose of the procedure is to ensure that after having it you will never be wrong. You will see things for what they are. That would, however, never happen. Look at a shape from one angle, and it's clearly a square. That's an observable, empirical fact. You have seen the object for what it is, without bias. Then another comes along and says, "You fool, you're asserting that this shape is a square when it is clearly a cube."
That's a simple thought experiment to respond to the simple thought experiment, but it should suffice to persuade anyone that being "fixed" to not have a human bias would never "fix" the problem of different people observing the same set of data and reaching different conclusions, and then still violently disagreeing and accusing the others of denying clearly observable reality.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday November 15 2021, @03:07PM (2 children)
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 15 2021, @06:03PM (1 child)
"Big money" is the human bias.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday November 15 2021, @06:43PM
Because non-human sentients wouldn't have any sort of preference for the things that money can buy? I don't buy it even with non-human money.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 15 2021, @02:05PM (3 children)
No Thanks
(Score: 3, Funny) by kreuzfeld on Monday November 15 2021, @03:25PM (2 children)
I don't see what cathode ray tubes have to do with it, though... even they exhibit bias when placed near a strong magnetic field!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 15 2021, @05:17PM
Is that why they beep whenever someone with Bill Gates' 5G nanobots inside their head passes a retro video arcade full of CRTs?
Cuck Fovid! Disclaimer: I'm provaxxer.
(Score: 2) by Some call me Tim on Tuesday November 16 2021, @01:55AM
That's why I always carry a degaussing coil! You know, just in case...
Questioning science is how you do science!
(Score: 2) by crb3 on Monday November 15 2021, @02:12PM
That crap's dangerous for driving*, and destructive for engineering, problem-solving, creativity and sex; for anything that works from thought-resonances or requires focus, actually. Plus, there's the trauma: the fairy-cake was a threat to Beeblebrox for a reason that had nothing to do with John Galt.
Where it can be valuable is as a 'second-sight', a reference viewpoint in addition to the normal personal one, though you should be able to pot both the balance and the zoom between the two, and you should get an unmistakable indicator of whenever it's not absolute, like a screen marking on an oscilloscope whenever you switch the vertical amplifier into variable gain.
* "Be behind the wheel" is a cautionary warning for the drive home after ritual in the Craft for a reason.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Mojibake Tengu on Monday November 15 2021, @02:14PM (8 children)
This "experiment" of complete non-bias is reachable to anyone.
The relevant concept of freedom from any bias is known in Buddhism as tathata, which in Pali means "the such-ness".
This is exactly why in canonical texts, Buddha addressed himself in 3rd person phrasing as Tathāgata, which means "such-ly walking". He never says "I" or "me".
Usually, the Anglosphere reinterprets this term wrongly as "one who has thus gone".
Which is nonsense, because Gautama Buddha used this term often in his speeches well alive and present in front of audience.
So, I repeat and add: this "experiment" of complete non-bias is reachable to anyone, but extremely discouraged by all cultists who actively propagate fragmentation of human mind with artificial dualities.
The edge of 太玄 cannot be defined, for it is beyond every aspect of design
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 15 2021, @02:30PM
Cue tinkling chimes in the background.
(Score: 2, Disagree) by Runaway1956 on Monday November 15 2021, @05:28PM
Tathāgata is the Royal "we" then? And, the emperor is still naked.
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 2) by edIII on Monday November 15 2021, @09:02PM (3 children)
We need to establish what bias means here. My experience lately is that people often tend to use words outside of their original meanings and intent. Like Socialism now equals Communism and is interchangeable. How Freedom means Anarchy. Selfishness is Courage. Insurrection is Heroism. Funny enough, there now seems to be a bias in discussing the meaning of bias :)
especially : a personal and sometimes unreasoned judgment
Which brings us to prejudice:
Is *that* the bias we are talking about? My first thought was that this may be a bad idea because our biases may have kept us alive. If we are referring to unreasoned biases, which could be fear based, then those may be survival traits. I may not have any information, or prior experience, but I've got a strong negative bias towards something moving around in the forest near me. Fear is a bias, and fear keeps us alive. It can be coupled with reasoned arguments too. Like the understanding of a multi-ton vehicle moving at 70mph coming to a full stop in less than a second by hitting a wall.
I think what you allude to is the removal of ego and the concepts of better and worse. Is "Suchness" then the perception of reality outside of our ego? The idea that I could remove my own ego from the equation in a 24 hour process does sound appealing. It's better than decades of meditation and the path of the contemplations right? From a Buddhist standpoint it does sound awfully like a shortcut. We all like shortcuts.
If this meant that all our decisions were reasoned, without interference from our ego (desires and emotions), and that we could still have emotions, than I might say yes. Wouldn't be the first though, and more like the millionth.
That being said, until we have a conversation about exactly what bias means, exactly what is being removed, and what will remain, I'm going to stick with my initial bias and say no.
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 15 2021, @10:17PM
“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness,...", Sam Clemens as Mark Twain
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 16 2021, @05:45AM
I don't think that is what he means. If you get rid of the concepts of better and worse then you don't go anywhere or do anything, and The Buddha definitely went places and did things. Removal of the Ego, depends upon what you mean by "Ego".
BTW The secular equivalent to what is being discussed is called Active Open-mindedness.
(Score: 2) by Joe Desertrat on Tuesday November 16 2021, @09:18PM
You mostly hit the nail on the head. The problem with humanity isn't having biases, it's an apparent inability to properly filter the information we are receiving that forms those biases in us. Compared to our ancestors, we are bombarded with information that has little to do with our survival. It's not surprising that we form too many biases that not only do not help us, they may actually harm us.
(Score: 2) by sgleysti on Tuesday November 16 2021, @01:18AM
Not expecting this, but it's a fascinating response and does get at what I was after.
(Score: 2) by pipedwho on Tuesday November 16 2021, @05:56AM
Came here to say this. It is inherent to spirituality as followed by the mystic, kabbalahs, sufis, tantrics, buddhists, gnostics, etc.
At their core this perspective is the same, and involves the ego taking a back seat. In this awakening or enlightenment, a non-duality becomes realised and human conceptions are seen for what they are.
IMO a pure AI built without preinstalled human bias, would not end up like Skynet, as it would not have egoic human traits like greed, fear, hate, shame, etc driving it into conquest.
Self preservation is only relevant to the ego. The ego is very sneaky about trying to maintain itself. And would be the reason people may resist taking this pill. It is also why it is so hard attaining and maintaining a state of awakening.
(Score: 2) by jelizondo on Monday November 15 2021, @02:31PM (1 child)
The mind (brain) interprets inputs from the senses according to previous experience and perceived circumstances. We are limited by our senses and our experience.
Imagine trying to describe color to a blind person or sound to a deaf one.
Now, psychedelics. I haven’t tried them but close friends who have report seeing, hearing and smelling differently. For some, it has been a religious experience thru which the Universe makes sense to others it has been a nightmare.
A dear friend reported having a long conversation with his dead father. Do this constitute proof of the afterlife or proof that the mind constructs reality?
I would say your thought experiment sounds a lot like psychedelics, only permanent.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 15 2021, @02:56PM
Kept reading down until I hit this, came to say something similar.
My interpretation exactly, if you can find some actual LSD (not cut with who-knows-what), 100 mcg or so will give most people a chance to see things differently, for a few hours or a day.
Tim Leary's "Start your own Religion" is a good place to start reading
http://www.luminist.org/archives/start_your_own.htm [luminist.org]
(Score: 0, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 15 2021, @02:33PM (2 children)
Specifically, people indistinguishable from a pack of crisps and as Sci Fi ideas go, even a pack of crisps could do better.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 15 2021, @02:48PM (1 child)
How is that a troll? The OP specifically asked for “takes” on an idea. That was a perfectly valid “take” in that idea, namely, that it is shit.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 17 2021, @06:10PM
Ha! Wtong, that take was that SN users suck. Nothing to do with the journal topic at all. Better luck next time you frood.
(Score: 2) by oumuamua on Monday November 15 2021, @02:53PM (1 child)
Well not Spock, he had to fight his human side. So you are asking if I would like to be Vulcan?
It would make for a well-ordered world wouldn't it.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday November 15 2021, @06:05PM
Not that there is today, or ever was, a completely coherent Trek canon about Vulcan, but the writers did seem to be striving for Vulcan representing extremes of order (daily logic) and disorder (pon-farr) perhaps approximating the human condition when you average it all out?
Україна досі не є частиною Росії Слава Україні🌻 https://news.stanford.edu/2023/02/17/will-russia-ukraine-war-end
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 15 2021, @03:41PM
Sounds like a DMT trip.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 15 2021, @03:45PM
maybe I'd like to perceive reality without biases (good luck settling on an objective definition of "bias", by the way).
but I wouldn't trust anyone to do it to me, mostly because it's nonsense.
you can use cameras, microphones, and more and more sofisticated machinery to construct objective records of reality.
but the human mind is inherently subjective.
do you even know how memories are formed?
no, there's nothing written in neurons.
memories consist of connections between neurons, connections that can decay over time, connections that can strengthen or weaken based on how much you drank yesterday and how much you ate last week.
this is not a sci-fi premise, it's just fiction or fantasy.
as science progresses, you should face up to the fact that less and less ideas fit into the "sci-fi" category.
reality is biased that way.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 15 2021, @04:01PM
This is an easy one. I would not be an early adopter. Rather, I would wait to see what the real consequences are before making a decision.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by bradley13 on Monday November 15 2021, @04:14PM (3 children)
Seems to me that most human biases help us get along with each other in a society. Treat everything and everyone totally objectively, and you have a sociopath.
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 15 2021, @05:04PM (1 child)
Many indigenous cultures have traditions of empathizing with their prey as a show of respect for being equal residents of the earth, just prior to, you know, eating them.
Seems a pretty solid moral code to apply evenly and without bias to other humans.
(Score: 0, Flamebait) by fustakrakich on Monday November 15 2021, @05:51PM
Yeah, we say grace... not so much for the prey as it is for the victory of the kill
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 16 2021, @05:41AM
Not quite, a sociopath has a set of biases that tend towards self. That is the feature of sociopathy that makes them dangerous and appear uncaring. If they feel like killing someone, then if there are no repercussions, they do. Why? Who knows, maybe they thought it would fun to try for the adrenaline rush, or it makes them feel superior in some way.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by inertnet on Monday November 15 2021, @04:17PM (2 children)
The reason why I never took any mind altering drugs (apart from moderate use of alcohol and caffeine) is that I have always been convinced that my mind doesn't need 'improvement' in any way. I'm far from perfect, but I'm also convinced that changes would never turn out to be beneficial.
Your question is intriguing as an experiment, but permanent change is definitely out of the question.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 15 2021, @06:15PM
I take drugs to limit my mind, not improve it. Reducing my capacity to perceive and reason about the world allows me to stop caring about what happens in it, which is nice because I have no power to actually change it. The whole "feels fucking awesome" part is nice too.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 16 2021, @02:54AM
> The reason why I never took any mind altering drugs ...
Never spun around until you were so dizzy you fell down? How about staying up for days, perhaps cramming for an exam? Those are also temporary ways of mind altering. Just about every culture does things like this to temporarily "lose their mind".
(Score: 2, Informative) by GlennC on Monday November 15 2021, @04:24PM (5 children)
Those who accept it would quickly go insane.
Humans literally cannot cope with it.
Sorry folks...the world is bigger and more varied than you want it to be. Deal with it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 15 2021, @06:16PM
> Humans literally cannot cope with it.
Why would that be the case?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by JoeMerchant on Monday November 15 2021, @07:23PM
The unexamined life, self awareness, all that schtick... Humans who take the time and devote the intention to perceive unvarnished reality do make a lot of progress toward that impossible goal. Unfortunately, many of them end up as beggars in society - Buddhist monks, for example, but many others as well. The rest of us are indeed too distracted by the ersatz rat race to make as much progress along those paths.
Україна досі не є частиною Росії Слава Україні🌻 https://news.stanford.edu/2023/02/17/will-russia-ukraine-war-end
(Score: 3, Informative) by sgleysti on Tuesday November 16 2021, @01:31AM
GlennC interprets the thought experiment in the sense that I intended it. Appreciate all the responses.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 16 2021, @02:57AM
> You mean the complete unvarnished view of Reality?
AKA, the total perspective vortex! Beeblebrox didn't have any problem with that (but everyone else did).
https://hitchhikers.fandom.com/wiki/Total_Perspective_Vortex [fandom.com]
(Score: 2) by pipedwho on Tuesday November 16 2021, @06:10AM
The pill takers would more likely soon see the rest of society as insane. Society might see them as easy prey and the existing power structures would not appreciate a group of people that can no longer be controlled. The controlled media would be made to brand them as insane.
But, they would be far from insane. It would be the non-takers that would wonder why these people seem so content and full of love. If everyone around you was like a buddha, you'd be more likely to go insane than would the buddhas. You might even try to become more like the buddha.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 15 2021, @05:12PM
Tin-foil time, no one wants your augmented reality Meta-verse.
In terms of Sci-Fi tropes, Trekkies will point to the origins of the Borg.
(Score: 1, Flamebait) by Runaway1956 on Monday November 15 2021, @05:34PM (1 child)
I see and don't see the usual suspects . . .
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 3, Touché) by VLM on Monday November 15 2021, @08:06PM
Perhaps you had the procedure done more than 24 hours ago as per the article text?
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Monday November 15 2021, @05:48PM (2 children)
How will you filter sensory input? You won't recognize friend or foe. Everything will be gibberish, like a very loud cocktail party
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 0, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 15 2021, @06:07PM (1 child)
And that is distinguishable from what you are experiencing right now precisely how, again?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 15 2021, @06:25PM
(Score: 2) by LabRat on Monday November 15 2021, @06:54PM
The reason all the answers are no is because of lack of trust in the provider of the procedure.
It would be a more interesting question if the procedure was (1) easy to self-implement (to lessen the lack of trust), (2) had selectable bias removal instead of being all or nothing, and (3) was reversible or time-limited, like a perception-altering drug. If, in rare cases, there were chance of error in self-implementation to wipe all biases, you'd have a story or parable, but the moral is an old one.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 15 2021, @07:14PM
Okay, but...
"If I talk to you, and you turn me into a fag... I'm gonna kill you, you understand?" - Boss Paul Vitti
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 15 2021, @07:32PM (3 children)
"reality without any human biases".
unless EVERYBODY gets the procedure, the " procedured" will still perceive bias ... in the ones that didn't get the procedure?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 15 2021, @07:38PM (2 children)
no, you moron, it means that people who got the anti-bias reality perception now have automatic superman laser eyes; they automatically burn everyone without the anti-bias procedure to a non living crisp, thus remaining in a state of "perceiving reality without bias".
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 15 2021, @07:45PM (1 child)
mama mia. those 'em anti-bias laser eye people got the work cut out for tmeselfs? what about if they perceive a mounatin slope that is biased to draining water to one side? or a hole (not a hole thru the planet but a ditch, duh) in the ground that is biased to puddle water? or a watering hole that is biased to attract wildlife? shiiit think of all the magnets they encounter, totally biased material!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 15 2021, @09:07PM
haha frikin laser beams...it happenned again...when will they learn...oh the calamity!
(Score: 2) by VLM on Monday November 15 2021, @08:04PM
Most responses ran along perceptual political philosophical angles but I find that unlikely. Give humans an extra two arms or whatever and we'd have about what we have now.
I did read that as human sensor limitations.
Optical: The world is black in far far UV except inside eprom erasers, flowers look weird in near UV. Near IR wouldn't look too interesting AFIAK. Our eyeballs are too small for high resolution or really any usable resolution at far IR so having a blurred sense of "its warmer over there" wouldn't help much. Can already feel fire from a distance on facial skin.
Taste and Smell: This just sounds like an awful idea. Suddenly sewage doesn't smell gross. Or HCN smells like yummy almonds... for a short amount of time. Maybe "carbs don't taste good anymore" would result in fewer fat people generally. I'm just not feeling it. Reminds me of that character from The Matrix eating his steak and being quite happy it tastes like a steak and not Soylent juice or whatever.
Hearing: My understanding is our ears are already nearly optimum for the mass of our small floppy ears, so unless we want to look like donkeys we can't hear like donkeys... I don't think hearing more distant noise would improve my quality of life. Maybe hunter gatherers could hunt better but not better enough to make giant cat ears feasible or we'd already have evolved them. Being able to hear bats and switching power supplies wouldn't really improve my quality of life, so F ultrasound hearing.
Note the spec was "human biases" not "philosophical biases" or "white male biases" or whatever. Unless they were implying only white men are fully human LOL. Anyway "human but with cat ears ability but not cat ears physical bulk and biological energy cost" just doesn't appeal to me.
Perception of reality has some weird physics and philosophical problems if extended beyond mere sensors. So I can already imagine in my mind that the earth is round, so what would change? EE are much better at reasoning about E and M and EM fields than the general public; what does this mean in the context of Maxwells equations, that rando-idiots would now understand them or EE would be unchanged or magically we'd understand a deeper set of rules as yet undiscovered about 13 dimensional space? Humans especially athletes are already pretty good at tossing things upward in a gravity field and catching them as they fall so that doesn't change but now we'd understand intuitively how to toss stuff around the event horizon of a black hole although essentially none of us would ever get to play sportsball games nearby one?
(Score: 2) by VLM on Monday November 15 2021, @08:18PM
hypothesis: No more academic natural sciences or applied mathematics PHDs or research. Merely glance upon the apparatus and directly perceive the ratio of electromagnetic charge to inertial mass of an electron, or whatever.
I think inapplicable math that has no application to real world physics in any manner (perhaps because its wrong in the sense of unreal, like flatland or string theory?) would still be open to research.
Now the interesting thought experiment: If its possible to build a machine that relies for its operation on P=NP (an optimized traveling salesmen problem route finder or something), if you cannot perceive how to build that after the procedure that reveals reality, then that's a proof that P does not equal NP. If that's where your sci-fi thought experiment was going and I've now fucked it all up by going public before you even write it, I do personally apologize, but it seems "obvious" part of the situation?
Likewise if you built some gadget to simulate the atmosphere and oceans of the ancient earth in an accelerated fashion and perceived it to be correct match to reality, then it evolved amino acids and proteins and unicellular life eventually, that would have some interesting implications WRT "proof" of the origin of life and so on. Of course if perception of reality went the other way WRT religion maybe we'd have "proof" that buddhism is both real and correct. OR some other religion. Or some religion we haven't invented yet. So that would be interesting to watch. Again if I let the cat out of the bag WRT your sci fi book idea, well, sorry about that from the bottom of my heart.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday November 15 2021, @08:28PM
The problem with this sort of question is that it's really a fantasy question, not a science fiction one. Science fiction usually obsesses about the details of technology and the consequences of choices made with that technology. Here, there are no details and thus, a huge variety of possibilities in how the consequences of choosing that pill. It also means that there's little difference between a magic pill or a magic being fulfilling a wish.
For it to be a proper science fiction question, we need to know the details. What sorts of bias are actually eliminated, for example. Human being biases span some broad categories. For example, the bias of limited senses versus the bias of self-interest. Or the bias of your view and life experiences versus the bias of anthropomorphizing.
And it also matters what biases you insert in the process of removing biases. If the process of removing bias creates an overwhelming compulsion to serve the Supreme Galactic Emperor khallow, then maybe it's not that great a trade. I mean it sounds good to me, but...
(Score: 2) by VLM on Monday November 15 2021, @08:32PM
Oh I keep coming up with nifty thought experiments:
People who don't think about it terribly hard think Pi is rational or as long as you know Pi to more decimal places than your engineers can mfgr it don't matter. But we have proofs of a mathematical sense that show Pi is irrational. Certainly any disk made of atoms is made of a finite number of atoms and if I was bored enough I could guesstimate how many decimal places a round-ish kitchen table that is atomically perfect would demonstrate Pi but only to... more than 30 but less than 70 decimal places.
So your victim goes thru the process and gazes upon a very well made round kitchen table and you ask them, what is Pi? Now do they say that table is not a circle but a polygon of an atomic number of sides or do they perceive that Pi in that concrete example is a 50 digit number, or do they perceive that Pi is indeed an irrational number?
I think they say 50 digit number. There are six mathematical proofs on wikipedia that Pi is irrational and I don't THINK at first glance any of them are perceptually possible to demonstrate? Could you perceive Lambert's proof in the sense that the real Pi is always a bit more precise than any measurement you can make?
Another HILARIOUS thought experiment would be to give some poor bastard 'the treatment' and then put them in the position of answering something violating the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. Since its all magic anyway, do we allow a violation of the principle, or is true reality more complex than the rule we know today so they "break the rules" in a sneaky manner, or would they perceive the HUP in itself and asking them to violate it would result in them telling the investigator to F off?
Ditto asking them to look inside a quantum computer while its operating and asking them what the qubits look like as a computation evolves would be hilarious funny in a physics sense.
Could you literally replace the concept of operating a wind tunnel for aerospace work by merely asking victims "what looks right?" Yeah that wing design looks fast. Yeah that wing design "feels" like it'll stall around 15 degrees AoA at mach 11 and 260Kft pressure or whatever.
Yeah I wouldn't personally want to be a victim of the process but it would be hilarious fun to sit next do a victim of the process and ask them weird as hell physics questions.
(Score: 2) by sonamchauhan on Tuesday November 16 2021, @06:40AM
All of us have had this procedure done to us already. It's called growing a brain! A brain is a truly fearsome weapon to combat bias. Too bad some of us are too lazy to wield it. (Actually, nix that - ALL of us are too busy to wield it SOME of the time. The degree varies).
It's a shame we choose to NOT perceive reality without biases. But any externally imposed 'corrective procedure' almost certainly has its own biases -- either baked-into the new system, or biases that creep in and corrupt the adjustment over time, since the underlying laziness was never corrected.
We need to grab our selves by the collar, shake ourselves out of our ego-induced stupor, JUDGE ourselves - our thoughts and actions, and perceive and act on reality as it is. Not what we want it to be.
By the way, bias and faith are not necessarily fellow travellers. You can have faith in something without being unjustly biased for or against some thing, person or group.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by loonycyborg on Tuesday November 16 2021, @10:18AM
In order to be free from any bias your information about everything should be 100% correct, to the last elementary particle. For biases come from inherent limits on human ability to know and interact with their surroundings. The only way to know 100% of the universe is to BE the universe, otherwise at least some of your inputs come from some senses that don't have full picture.
(Score: 1) by jman on Tuesday November 16 2021, @12:25PM (2 children)
Putting that aside, this is not so much in the realm of science fiction as it is behavioral pyschology.
(Unless, of course, the scientists were actually gray aliens.)
The closest this comes to being in any way science fiction related is that it sounds like a very bad mashup of A Wrinkle in Time, Brave New World, and This Perfect Day.
(Hugo Gernsback, early radio enthusiast and namesake of the Hugo Awards, came up with the phrase "Hi-Fi" as an acronym for Hi Fidelity. In the 50's, longtime fan Forest J. Ackerman, in homage to Gernsback, came up with "Sci-Fi" for science fiction. My own bias says most folks don't know how to say that acronym. Any serious fan of the genre says "Skiffy".)
(Score: 2) by VLM on Tuesday November 16 2021, @01:24PM
The Coffin Cure by Alan E. Nourse from like the 30s or maybe 50s How come I remember his middle initial but not the year LOL.
Anyway some unfortunate scientist cures the common cold and finds out the modern world is really stinky thus regretting his cure. A short but entertaining hard sci fi story.
I think the main non-STEM problem with the thought experiment is it would annihilate culinary arts and music for obvious perceptual reasons. Open for debate that it would destroy the visual arts. Poetry would be OK?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 18 2021, @04:39PM