#159 — Conscious
Episode Stats
Words per Minute
163.4124
Summary
Annika Harris is an author, editor, and consultant for Science Writers. She s the author of the children s book I Wonder, and a collaborator on Susan Kaiser Greenland s Mindful Games activity cards. Her work has appeared in the New York Times, and she lives with her husband, the neuroscientist, author, and podcaster, Sam Harris, and their two children. In this episode, we talk about Annika s new book, Conscious: A Brief Guide to the Fundamental Mystery of the Mind, and why it s so important to have a conversation about consciousness with someone who s written a book about it. We don t run ads on the podcast, and therefore, made possible entirely through the support of our subscribers, we re made possible by becoming one. So if you enjoy what we re doing here, please consider becoming a member of the M.I.S. community. And if you re not a subscriber, you ll need to subscribe to the Making Sense Podcast to keep up to date with the latest episodes of the podcast. You ll get access to all sorts of great resources, including the latest podcasts, books, and events happening around the world, including The Huffington Post, Slate, and more! Thanks for listening, and Happy Listening! Sam Harris - The Making Sense Team to quote: "I don t know why this is a bad thing." - Emily Poe - "It's a totally awkward thing to do." - "Why not do this?" - "Let me know what you think it is?" - "We should really do this? "It might be better than that" - "That's a good thing?" - What do you think I don't do? - "A bad thing? I don t do it? -- "A good thing? " - "a bad thing?" - "A sign that I do not do that? " That's a sign that it may be a bad sign by me was not a bad one? " -- "I do not have a good one??" What do I do that I think I do better than this than that? -- "That was not that? ? -- that I would like to do this, right? I think that I have a bad m a good sign by you do that by that I'm not not a sign by that ...
Transcript
00:00:10.880
Just a note to say that if you're hearing this, you are not currently on our subscriber
00:00:14.680
feed and will only be hearing the first part of this conversation.
00:00:18.420
In order to access full episodes of the Making Sense Podcast, you'll need to subscribe at
00:00:24.060
There you'll find our private RSS feed to add to your favorite podcatcher, along with
00:00:30.520
We don't run ads on the podcast, and therefore it's made possible entirely through the support
00:00:35.880
So if you enjoy what we're doing here, please consider becoming one.
00:00:54.080
Just a reminder that enterprise accounts are available on the Waking Up app.
00:00:58.360
If you're interested in that, or work for a company that might be interested, you can
00:01:06.100
And also, new features are rolling out on the app soon.
00:01:10.960
You'll be able to sit in groups with friends and colleagues.
00:01:14.740
There are notifications and reminders that you can turn on in the app, which many people
00:01:19.900
You can set a time to meditate each day with a reminder, and notifications will tell you
00:01:25.340
when new lessons or new features are hitting the app.
00:01:29.640
Anyway, things are rolling along on that front.
00:01:42.480
And as luck would have it, she has a book that we were eager to talk about.
00:01:48.940
The book is Conscious, A Brief Guide to the Fundamental Mystery of the Mind.
00:01:56.580
Annika Harris is an author, editor, and consultant for Science Writers.
00:02:01.160
She's the author of the children's book, I Wonder, and a collaborator on Susan Kaiser Greenland's
00:02:06.820
Her work has appeared in the New York Times, and she lives with her husband, the neuroscientist,
00:02:12.260
author, and podcaster, Sam Harris, and their two children.
00:02:17.920
The thing that's not here, though implicit in her being an editor and consultant for Science
00:02:23.140
Writers, Annika has edited all my written work since my first book, The End of Faith,
00:02:30.680
And once I discovered her talents as an editor, I recommended that she do it professionally,
00:02:35.260
so she's collaborated with other scientists, neuroscientists and physicists mainly.
00:02:39.840
And she wrote the children's book, I Wonder, which many of you liked.
00:02:43.540
But this is the first book that she's written for grown-ups.
00:02:47.040
And the focus of the book is the nature of consciousness and why it is so inscrutable.
00:02:53.020
This is something that not everyone recognizes.
00:02:58.500
I read some of the blurbs in a previous housekeeping, but Marco Iacoboni, neuroscientist, says,
00:03:04.880
I've read many, many great books on consciousness in my life as a neuroscientist.
00:03:11.200
Tim Urban, the author of the Wait But Why blog, writes,
00:03:15.660
One of those books that fundamentally shifts the way you think about reality.
00:03:25.900
In this gem of a book, Annika Harris tackles consciousness controversies with incisive rigor
00:03:30.340
and clarity, in a style that's accessible and captivating.
00:03:34.300
Anyway, it's a great look at the problem of consciousness.
00:04:03.800
We should really have other people here, I think.
00:04:09.460
I already can tell I have a hostile witness here.
00:04:12.280
Okay, well, you have a new book coming out for grown-ups that we're going to talk about.
00:04:16.720
So let's talk about how overjoyed you are to be doing this podcast.
00:04:25.360
I don't know, because part of it is just that this is a totally awkward thing to do,
00:04:30.080
which is why I think it might be better if we had...
00:04:38.680
First, the reality is, I just realized this, our first date was filled with a conversation
00:04:49.960
We basically spoke about consciousness and free will and the other topics in your book.
00:04:56.480
Now, it may be a bad sign that that was followed by you avoiding me for six months
00:05:01.700
No, but I mean, the thing I thought about also before we did this is that the friend
00:05:09.240
who sat us up had said to me that she didn't know, of course, whether there'd be a romantic
00:05:15.860
connection, but that she knew that we would be great friends because we talk about and think
00:05:24.380
We've been thinking about a lot of the same things for most of our lives.
00:05:28.480
And this was the topic of, I think, mostly what we talked about that the first time we
00:05:36.880
Not to give a false impression, we don't spend a lot of time talking about these things
00:05:41.440
So, happily, your book is an excuse to get into it.
00:05:46.280
And your book is Conscious, A Brief Guide to the Fundamental Mystery of the Mind.
00:05:52.880
I think you lucked out in being overruled on your title.
00:06:18.540
I think we can go back to what's the book about.
00:06:21.080
Say, you know, I obviously know what the book is about, but why don't you say something
00:07:08.260
So, my book is about the science and philosophy of consciousness, and it focuses on why consciousness
00:07:16.720
But one of the things that it does that has always been interesting to me, and that, of
00:07:22.800
course, you and I have talked a lot about, is breaking through false intuitions.
00:07:27.940
And it's something that I find incredibly interesting to do, and interesting that we often reach
00:07:37.120
deeper truths, more fundamental truths, a better picture of the reality around us when
00:07:44.300
we can break through intuitions that are misleading us or that are giving us false information about
00:07:50.360
the world around us, even if they're helpful for us at the time.
00:07:53.160
I was thinking earlier about the fact that even as a child, this was an interesting exercise
00:08:00.260
This was something, and I actually begin the book this way.
00:08:02.840
So, I talk about just my experience of breaking through the intuition, basically that the earth
00:08:09.080
is flat and that we're on it underneath the sky rather than on a sphere in the way that we are.
00:08:16.280
But I remember being a child and trying to think of paradoxes or make up paradoxes just to create
00:08:24.700
this feeling of kind of breaking out of this day-to-day experience that I knew in some ways
00:08:29.940
was misguiding me or keeping me apart from the deeper mysteries.
00:08:35.260
So, what are some of the intuitions that are so off around consciousness?
00:08:40.320
So, just to give some context, you and I both have this experience of being in dialogue
00:08:44.540
with some very smart people who seem not to get, the most charitable thing to say is they
00:08:51.540
have fundamentally different intuitions about consciousness and what could be plausible to
00:08:57.780
think about it, what's interesting about it, what is mysterious about it.
00:09:04.040
I mean, this is true of the nature of the self or its illusory nature.
00:09:10.100
Those are the big ones that I think are misleading us in terms of being able to understand consciousness.
00:09:16.300
Well, so free will and the self are really two sides of the same coin.
00:09:20.860
And then there's the hard problem of consciousness, which is more the focus of your book, although
00:09:27.140
So, you and I are almost the worst people to diagnose this problem because we're really,
00:09:34.620
we're totally aligned on our intuitions here and we're fairly mystified by the responses
00:09:43.380
We've been in some funny circumstances, too, where we cannot let go of our side.
00:09:47.780
We happen to be in the same place at an event or dinner where we've encountered someone who
00:09:52.540
has a very different intuition and neither of us can let this debate go.
00:09:56.800
And so we'll sit there for two hours until everyone else is left trying to get the other
00:10:04.960
We basically try to perform an exorcism on this person.
00:10:10.420
But so, but we'll start with the hard problem and the intuition that some people have that
00:10:17.280
it either doesn't exist or it's not hard or there's no mystery around consciousness that
00:10:22.880
is different from any other thing we don't yet understand scientifically.
00:10:29.300
I understand it in a sense because, so the hard problem, I believe that the term was
00:10:39.120
But this is obviously, this is a problem that people have encountered for much longer than
00:10:47.300
So it's, it's a concept that has been around for a very long time.
00:10:51.560
And he gave us this shorthand, which is great and very useful in conversation.
00:10:56.040
But the problem is, is essentially, why is it that any configuration of non-conscious material,
00:11:04.160
since we obviously know that everything in the universe is, is made of the same things,
00:11:09.140
the, the, the ingredients are the same for everything.
00:11:12.340
And, but that particles get configured in such a way that suddenly the matter itself entails
00:11:20.300
And so there's almost no explanation or there's really no explanation we could think of that
00:11:26.780
we could ever give that would make it less mysterious because it's always non-conscious matter
00:11:33.140
getting arranged in a very specific way so that it suddenly lights up from the inside.
00:11:39.400
And so it seems that no matter how much we know about the brain, there's nothing that
00:11:44.880
will, that will ever make this less mysterious.
00:11:49.760
And so that, so Chalmers was contrasting this problem, this mystery to the quote unquote easier
00:11:56.760
problems, which are more about how the brain processes, which parts of the brain are responsible
00:12:02.380
for which functions and the more complex understanding that we now have, since we have a science of
00:12:08.680
the brain, of which experiences and which behaviors are correlated with which brain states.
00:12:15.080
So an easy problem of consciousness would be something like, why is vision the way it is?
00:12:20.300
Why is there a one-to-one mapping, say, of the visual field onto the visual cortex?
00:12:25.440
But the hard problem is, why is it like something to see?
00:12:31.120
As you said, it seems like, you know, you have complex systems doing complex things.
00:12:36.420
At no point should it be necessary, or it's certainly not obvious why it would be necessary,
00:12:41.940
that it be like something from the inside to be that system.
00:12:46.680
Because we know so much of this can happen unconsciously, even in our own case, or it certainly
00:12:53.240
We may not know that as much as we think we do.
00:12:55.160
But so now I've just used this phrase a few times, like something to be a system, and
00:13:01.100
that comes from Thomas Nagel's essay, What Is It Like to Be a Bat?, where he defined consciousness
00:13:07.780
If it is like something to be a bat, that's what we mean by consciousness in the case of
00:13:13.200
a bat, whether we can ever understand what it's like to be a bat or not.
00:13:16.720
Now, this phrase trips off our tongues without any problem, and yet I notice that it confuses
00:13:28.080
Again, people who have the opposite intuition about consciousness.
00:13:31.580
They either think, well, it's like something to be anything.
00:13:35.460
It's like something to be that couch you're sitting on, right?
00:13:38.400
Well, but it's partly a linguistic issue, that it doesn't actually mean anything.
00:13:46.720
I actually like the word experience better, even though that can be misunderstood too.
00:13:53.760
One, there are people who actually don't see consciousness and experience as being something
00:14:02.640
But there's another group of people who actually get the hard problem, but they still have a
00:14:08.240
hard time getting their minds around this language.
00:14:12.340
And I actually, I noticed that with most of those people, if you just have a little back
00:14:19.600
And you've written about this too, just distinguishing between collections of matter or systems that
00:14:26.240
you think are having an experience and those that aren't.
00:14:29.600
And that that difference, that basic difference is what we mean by consciousness, what we're talking
00:14:35.560
So if you just ask the person, you know, is there something that it's like to be you right
00:14:41.360
And of course, they don't even have to think about it.
00:14:45.960
And then you say, is it like something to be your shoelace or is your chair having an experience
00:14:53.360
And so it doesn't even matter what the truth is.
00:14:56.600
Just being able to distinguish between like, OK, yes, there's I have an immediate response to
00:15:00.920
And so therefore, I understand what you're talking about.
00:15:04.420
So I guess the confusion that I notice is that people, when you say this phrase, what
00:15:14.680
What is it like from the outside to be that thing?
00:15:19.600
But then I think experience does the trick there.
00:15:21.620
You can say what kind of experience does that have?
00:15:24.620
OK, so why is it not straightforward to judge the consciousness of a system or a thing from
00:15:33.860
What is the evidence that consciousness exists?
00:15:37.640
So this is so listeners know I begin my discussion and my basically the book takes the reader through
00:15:44.880
my own thought processes over the last 15 years or so and what I've arrived at and why I've
00:15:51.720
become open to some of the stranger theories that are out there that postulate that consciousness
00:15:58.100
could be a more fundamental feature of the universe.
00:16:01.500
And so I begin this investigation of breaking through our intuitions and getting as close
00:16:09.020
in my own thoughts as I've been able to at what are intuitions and could they be wrong?
00:16:17.360
And so I think the most primary intuitions we have about consciousness live in these two
00:16:28.720
Is there any behavior on the outside or anything we can witness on the outside of a system that
00:16:33.700
can tell us conclusively that consciousness is present in that system?
00:16:41.080
And that's something that I then question throughout the book.
00:16:43.540
But I think it's interesting because we feel very strongly that the answer is yes.
00:16:47.920
If I see that my daughter has fallen down and is crying and you ask me, is all this behavior
00:16:55.660
you're seeing right now, evidence that she's conscious, I would say, absolutely.
00:17:00.640
Just to be clear, this is not the normal way I parent with you.
00:17:11.300
In the book, I use the example of someone witnessing a car accident, I think, and, you know, being
00:17:19.660
There's just endless amount of behaviors that we witness that we think, yes, that is absolute
00:17:31.520
And I think it's interesting to question that, to question whether there is something that
00:17:39.560
by definition gives us evidence that there is consciousness there.
00:17:48.220
We all meet people in dreams, presumably they're not conscious or don't even exist, and they
00:17:54.520
We will almost certainly build robots at a certain point which pass the Turing test.
00:18:02.140
And if we don't understand the material basis of consciousness at the time we produce those
00:18:07.640
robots, we won't know whether or not they're conscious, and yet they may seem to be conscious.
00:18:13.040
And then conversely, there are people who we know, due to neurological injury, are still
00:18:22.380
And one example I think you talk about in the book is locked-in syndrome.
00:18:26.160
And I think that I actually start there with all of the cases we can give where we don't
00:18:34.940
And there is a full, very complex, you know, as complex as our own experiences right now
00:18:42.660
that are present in people who are completely paralyzed, and we couldn't ever see that evidence
00:18:48.000
I think that's an interesting starting place for whether we can ever pinpoint certain behaviors
00:18:53.480
that we can say conclusively are evidence of consciousness.
00:18:57.480
And then the second question is, essentially, is consciousness doing anything?
00:19:05.220
And our reflexive answer with that, again, is yes, and my intuition goes that way, too.
00:19:10.540
But I think these are the kind of the simplest, deepest intuitions we have, and I wanted to start
00:19:15.960
there in terms of challenging our intuitions and trying to break through some of them.
00:19:21.880
So an example of the second question, even though it's very similar to the first, but it's getting
00:19:29.080
at it from a slightly different angle, would be, you know, just deciding to write a book
00:19:35.660
It feels very strongly that consciousness is driving all of that.
00:19:41.260
It feels like every time I make a decision or plan almost anything, consciousness is the
00:19:48.500
It clearly has a role in my behavior, and it seems to have a role at the very beginning.
00:19:55.040
And the science, actually, you know, as you know and have talked about and written about,
00:20:00.280
And so that's an intuition that we can start to chip away at pretty quickly.
00:20:05.620
And I think you start to go down very interesting paths of contemplation when you begin with these
00:20:14.600
Yeah, so it's not clear what consciousness is doing, and the concern here in philosophy
00:20:21.680
has been that consciousness is a so-called epiphenomenon, which is to say it's something
00:20:28.060
that stands outside the stream of phenomenon that are causal.
00:20:33.640
And if consciousness is doing anything, it has to be doing it at the level of, in our case,
00:20:39.640
the brain's causal pattern, you know, the neurophysiology.
00:20:43.540
So it's the most well-subscribed view at this point is that consciousness, whatever it is
00:20:48.180
at the level of experience, it is, you know, the fact that the lights are on, the fact that
00:20:54.200
That's how it seems from the first person side.
00:20:56.500
But there's some third person level of description, which is its cash value at the level of causality.
00:21:04.020
So if there's certain, if some things can only be done consciously, that's because whatever
00:21:09.480
consciousness is at the level of neurophysiology, in our case, that has to be part of the causal
00:21:16.500
But it's a little more mysterious than that in that, and you just alluded to this, which
00:21:21.300
is that anything we're conscious of, I mean, take your writing process, the decision to write,
00:21:27.240
the decision to sit down precisely at that moment to write, the decision about where to start
00:21:32.080
relative to what you had written previously, the word choice to start the next sentence,
00:21:38.500
anything you can point to in that process, no matter how deliberative it seems, is preceded
00:21:44.980
by events in your brain of which you're not conscious, of which there's no conscious correlate.
00:21:51.020
And the question is, why does any of that, that seemingly could all happen on its own,
00:21:56.620
And so what is consciousness adding to that process?
00:22:00.960
And the zombie thought experiment has always been instrumental in this, but I actually think
00:22:05.760
at this point, because AI is so in our minds because of pop culture and films, I think it's easy for
00:22:14.740
us to imagine AI doing a lot of the things that we are capable of without consciousness.
00:22:24.560
But even something like vision, it seems very natural to us that we have an experience of seeing
00:22:30.500
things and we understand that there are processes in the brain and light is bouncing off the objects
00:22:35.980
in the room and hitting our retina and our brain and we're processing this.
00:22:40.020
But we can easily see that a computer, a camera, or a very advanced AI could be doing all of the
00:22:48.280
processing, the visual processing that we're doing without having an experience like the one we're
00:22:55.120
It's a very specific feeling content of consciousness to be seeing the color blue.
00:23:01.560
And that's not necessarily, or it doesn't seem to us to be necessary for the processing to take place.
00:23:08.380
So the idea that consciousness might not be doing anything is problematic or perceived to
00:23:15.240
be problematic from an evolutionary point of view because people wonder, well, then why
00:23:21.420
Surely it must be doing something because it must be expensive metabolically on some level,
00:23:32.560
Now, again, not everything that's emerged has an evolutionary rationale.
00:23:37.660
Now, there are things that just have come along for free that aren't really selected for.
00:23:43.200
But our intuitions are so aligned with that theory also.
00:23:46.660
It really feels like, you know, the love and my desire to protect my child is the thing that
00:23:53.200
will give me that extra power, that extra strength, that extra will.
00:24:01.220
The fact that it's like something to want to protect your child rather than just blindly coded
00:24:09.240
Yeah, no, it seems to us that the feelings of love and fear, probably primarily, but of
00:24:16.160
course, all of the other emotions and desires and intentions, it seems that our experience
00:24:21.480
of them is the thing that gives them their power.
00:24:23.720
Except we know, the case of fear is a great example because we know that the startle response
00:24:28.200
has already hit the amygdala before you're aware you've been startled.
00:24:32.100
Yeah, no, so I think we're probably wrong about this.
00:24:35.120
And again, the zombie thought experiment can get you there.
00:24:38.400
But just imagining an AI that's been programmed to, above all else, protect this other robot,
00:24:44.340
you can call it its child, whatever it is, it doesn't seem to us that it would require
00:24:50.120
that it have an experience in order to follow that programming.
00:24:54.700
So the argument about evolution is one that sends many people, including myself, down the
00:25:03.780
path of, is it possible that consciousness is a fundamental feature of all matter, and
00:25:15.080
Of course, if we're talking very minimal forms, if we're talking the level of atoms or very
00:25:20.180
minimal information processing, it's important to not confuse consciousness with complex
00:25:26.220
There's no one is postulating that if it's a more fundamental feature, it is anything like
00:25:36.940
Okay, so let me just understand the move you just made.
00:25:39.140
So the idea that consciousness may not be doing anything seems problematic if you think that
00:25:45.700
consciousness had to have emerged in the process of evolution, because by default we expect those
00:25:52.740
things to have been costly in some way and to have been selected for, and therefore, by
00:25:57.880
definition, they were leading to differential success in breeding and survival.
00:26:02.860
So if consciousness isn't doing any of that, that seems mysterious, unless you posit that it
00:26:09.880
is a far more fundamental feature of physical reality than that.
00:26:13.860
And the name for that view, the general family of views in philosophy, is panpsychism.
00:26:22.480
So I warned you to tread lightly on panpsychism, because it seems...
00:26:28.400
I actually, I kind of opened the question to the world to come up with a better name.
00:26:33.780
It just, it sounds like something very unscientific or pseudoscientific.
00:26:39.280
And just on the face of it, it sounds like a crazy idea, which it really, I feel like
00:26:47.000
And I actually shouldn't say I'm a full proponent of it, because in my book I say, and I'm still
00:26:52.660
in the same place, that I'm really just open to it.
00:26:55.400
I think it's a category of theories that are very interesting and worth exploring.
00:27:00.720
I think it's just as likely that even though it is as mysterious as it is, it's possible
00:27:06.840
that it requires, that consciousness requires a brain and that consciousness does not emerge
00:27:11.640
until we have brain or a nervous system present.
00:27:15.720
But I think this other way of looking at consciousness is very interesting.
00:27:20.980
And I feel like I'm a good person to fight for it or to fight for more people being open
00:27:26.460
to it, because I completely dismissed it when I first encountered it.
00:27:30.800
And like most people, they feel that it's just the idea sounds completely crazy.
00:27:35.620
So I cite in my book this great title of an article by Philip Goff, which is,
00:27:42.060
Panpsychism is Crazy, But It's Also Most Probably True.
00:27:45.760
And that really gets at, for me, the point at which I started to take panpsychism more seriously.
00:27:53.320
So it was something that I completely dismissed when I first encountered it and thought it
00:28:01.680
There are different levels at which you could imagine consciousness is integrated with the
00:28:10.080
Well, there are maybe three different levels at which people think consciousness could be
00:28:18.100
appearing under this umbrella term panpsychism.
00:28:21.120
And one is at the level of information processing, which, as far as I know, that's where David
00:28:26.300
Chalmers feels that it makes the most sense for it to emerge.
00:28:30.740
He may be more open to a deeper level than that now.
00:28:36.140
He writes about the possibility that a thermostat could be conscious.
00:28:41.640
And then some people postulate that it is a fundamental feature of matter itself.
00:28:51.720
So any matter down to the level of individual particles, that consciousness is itself a property
00:29:04.260
And there is some level of experience, no matter how minimal and completely unlike.
00:29:11.680
I mean, anyone who proposes these theories acknowledges that it would be unrecognizable to us, the type
00:29:24.360
That is a very different experience from the one we have as human beings.
00:29:28.940
You know, navigating the world with sonar, just what that feels like must feel very different.
00:29:34.200
It must be a very different experience from navigating the world using vision.
00:29:37.880
And then obviously, the more simple the system, if consciousness is present in everything,
00:29:44.320
then we're talking about such a minimal level of experience.
00:29:47.340
It's not something we could ever even try to imagine.
00:29:54.440
In one of the chapters of my book, I actually try to give a sense of what consciousness could
00:30:03.060
And I kind of talk the reader through this guided imagery.
00:30:06.600
But I think if it's possible that consciousness is present in all matter, most experience that
00:30:13.580
exists is nothing like the experience we have as human beings.
00:30:17.600
It's probably a very rare form of consciousness.
00:30:20.320
And it's also not experience that you would expect.
00:30:23.800
If you'd like to continue listening to this conversation, you'll need to subscribe at
00:30:31.440
Once you do, you'll get access to all full-length episodes of the Making Sense podcast, along
00:30:36.020
with other subscriber-only content, including bonus episodes and AMAs and the conversations
00:30:43.660
The Making Sense podcast is ad-free and relies entirely on listener support.