If it seems like I haven’t been posting my “usual” it’s only because you’re not following me on G+. Just saying.
Category Archives: Random
Boy was I excited to read that new Nature paper where scientists report experimentally inducing lucid dreaming in people. Pretty cool, right? But then right in the abstract I run across my biggest pet peeve whenever people use the dreaded c-word: blatant terminological inconsistency. Not just an inconsistency across different papers, or buried in a footnote, but between a title and an abstract and within the abstract itself. Consider the title of the paper:
Induction of self awareness in dreams through frontal low current stimulation of gamma activity
The term “self-awareness” makes sense here because if normal dream awareness is environmentally-decoupled 1st order awareness than lucid dreaming is a 2nd order awareness because you become meta-aware of the fact that you are first-order dream-aware. So far so good. Now consider the abstract:
Recent findings link fronto-temporal gamma electroencephalographic (EEG) activity to conscious awareness in dreams, but a causal relationship has not yet been established. We found that current stimulation in the lower gamma band during REM sleep influences ongoing brain activity and induces self-reflective awareness in dreams. Other stimulation frequencies were not effective, suggesting that higher order consciousness is indeed related to synchronous oscillations around 25 and 40 Hz.
Gah! What a confusing mess of conflicting concepts. The title says “self-awareness” but the first sentence talks instead about “conscious awareness”. It’s an elementary mistake to confuse consciousness with self-consciousness, or at least to conflate them without making an immediate qualification of why you are violating standard practice in so doing. While there are certainly theorists out there who are skeptical about the very idea of “1st order” awareness being cleanly demaracted from “2nd order” awareness (Dan Dennett comes to mind), it goes without saying this is a highly controversial position that cannot just be assumed without begging the question. Immediate red flag.
The first sentence also references previous findings about the neural correlates of “conscious awareness” being linked to specific gamma frequencies of neural activity in fronto-temporal networks. The authors say though that correlation is not causation. The next sentence then makes us believe the study will provide that missing causal evidence about conscious awareness and gamma frequencies.
Yet the authors don’t say that. What they say instead is that they’ve found evidence that gamma frequencies are linked to “self-reflective awareness” and “higher-order consciousness”, which are again are theoretically distinct concepts than “conscious awareness” unless you are pretheoretically committed to a kind of higher-order theory of consciousness. But even that wouldn’t be quite right because on, e.g. Rosenthal’s HOT theory, a higher-order thought would give rise to first-order awareness not lucid dreaming, which is about self-awareness. On higher-order views, you would technically need a 3rd order awareness to count as lucid dreaming.
The following is a list of all the books I’ve read from front to cover in 2013, starting from the most recently finished. The books in bold are ones that were most influential to my thinking, or particularly fascinating.
- The Gap: The Science of What Separates Us from Other Animals – Thomas Suddendorf
- The Hunger Games – Suzanne Collins
- A Manual for Creating Atheists – Boghossian, Peter
- Simulation and Similarity: Using Models to Understand the World – Weisberg, Michael
- The Panda’s Thumb: More Reflections in Natural History – Gould, Stephen Jay
- Brain Imaging: What It Can (and Cannot) Tell Us about Consciousness – Shulman, R G
- Consciousness and the Social Brain – Graziano, Michael S A
- Wired for God?: The Biology of Spiritual Experience – Foster, Charles
- Genius: The Life and Science of Richard Feynman – Gleick, James
- The Unpredictable Species – Lieberman, Philip
- The God Argument: The Case against Religion and for Humanism – Grayling, A.C.
- Stumbling on Happiness – Gilbert, Daniel
- The Geography of Thought: How Asians and Westerners Think Differently… and Why – Nisbett, Richard E.
- Civilization and Its Discontents – Freud, Sigmund
- The Mating Mind: How Sexual Choice Shaped the Evolution of Human Nature – Miller, Geoffrey
- Radicalizing Enactivism: Basic Minds Without Content – Hutto, Daniel D.
- Willpower: Rediscovering the Greatest Human Strength – Baumeister, Roy F.
- Beyond Good and Evil – Nietzsche, Friedrich
- Marriage Confidential: The Post-Romantic Age of Workhorse Wives, Royal Children, Undersexed Spouses, and Rebel Couples Who Are Rewriting the Rules – Haag, Pamela
- Surfaces and Essences: Analogy as the Fuel and Fire of Thinking – Hofstadter, Douglas R.
- The Upside of Irrationality: The Unexpected Benefits of Defying Logic at Work and at Home – Ariely, Dan
- The Future of an Illusion – Freud, Sigmund
- Fooled by Randomness: The Hidden Role of Chance in Life and in the Markets – Taleb, Nassim Nicholas
- How to Create a Mind: The Secret of Human Thought Revealed – Kurzweil, Ray
- On the Genealogy of Morality: A Polemic – Nietzsche, Friedrich
- The Mind-Body Problem – Goldstein, Rebecca Newberger
- The Marvelous Learning Animal: What Makes Human Behavior Unique – Staats, Arthur W.
- Sync: The Emerging Science of Spontaneous Order – Strogatz, Steven H.
- The Cultural Animal: Human Nature, Meaning, and Social Life – Baumeister, Roy F.
- Mind and Cosmos: Why the Materialist Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature Is Almost Certainly False – Nagel, Thomas
- The Social Construction of What? – Hacking, Ian
- 36 Arguments for the Existence of God: A Work of Fiction – Goldstein, Rebecca Newberger
- Stiff: The Curious Lives of Human Cadavers – Roach, Mary
- Monkey Mind: A Memoir of Anxiety – Smith, Daniel B.
- The Minds of the Bible: Speculations on the Cultural Evolution of Human Consciousness – Cohn, James
- Brain on Fire: My Month of Madness – Cahalan, Susannah
- What a Plant Knows: A Field Guide to the Senses – Chamovitz, Daniel
- Reconstruction in Philosophy – Dewey, John
- Against All Gods: Six Polemics on Religion and an Essay on Kindness – Grayling, A.C.
- The Logic Of Modern Physics – Bridgman, Percy W.
- The End of Christianity – Loftus, John W.
- Inventing Temperature: Measurement and Scientific Progress – Chang, Hasok
- The New Executive Brain: Frontal Lobes in a Complex World – Goldberg, Elkhonon
- Thomas Jefferson: Author of America – Hitchens, Christopher
- Born Believers: The Science of Children’s Religious Belief – Barrett, Justin L.
- Brains: How They Seem to Work – Purves, Dale
- A Man Without Words – Schaller, Susan
- Beyond Morality – Garner, Richard
- Hallucinations – Sacks, Oliver
- The Signal and the Noise: Why So Many Predictions Fail – But Some Don’t – Silver, Nate
- Antifragile: Things That Gain from Disorder – Taleb, Nassim Nicholas
- The Information: A History, A Theory, A Flood – Gleick, James
- Ubik – Dick, Philip K.
- The Art Instinct: Beauty, Pleasure, and Human Evolution – Dutton, Denis
Looking at love from the perspective of time is instructive. Infatuation can grow into love given time and a dose of life’s realities, which romance by definition lacks. But first it has to shed its blindness — another of infatuation’s defining characteristics — and its egocentricity. This is the egocentricity of hunger, the need to consume and possess the other’s presence, and thereby to satisfy one’s own appetite. Mature love is different. It comes when one clearly sees the other in his or her individuality, and can therefore acknowledge it; only with such a distance does true closeness come. Romantic infatuation tries to negate otherness, to achieve a merging or identification as if the Hermaphroditic myth, in which lovers are sundered halves of the same being, were true. Love proper is an open-eyed recognition of separateness — but of separateness connected. That is the beauty of it; it lies in the connection, mutual and willed, that two individuals choose to make.
~ A.C. Grayling, The God Argument: The Case Against Religion and for Humanism, p. 202
For what it’s worth, Erich Fromm makes a similar point in his supremely wise book The Art of Love.
You might be wondering why this blog has recently downgraded to a series of quotes from random books I’m reading, but I want to assure you: it is not for lack of writing! Rather, as is typical during the summer, I am throwing almost of my writing energies into my Qualifying Paper, with a smidgen left over for emails, tweets, and fluffy blog posts (like this one!). To give you a flavor of the project monopolizing my scholarly willpower, the current but highly tentative title for the paper is “A Genealogical Defense of Normative Nihilism”. And if you can’t tell by the dreary and pompous title, yes, it is highly ambitious paper, perhaps too ambitious, a perennial problem for my philosophical projects. I can’t help it though. I loathe the idea of writing a paper that only moves a nanometer forward in conceptual space. I want to leap, not crawl.