He is right. It seems to me, every part of my life full of passion and meaning are really full of problems, imperfection and tension. I was madly in love with this woman some time back. And she was utterly imperfect. Some of her annoyed me, some of her angered me. I disagreed with her and had internal discussions with her every day. We were extremely clumsy. We could always sense that the other was about to say something, but holding it back in fear. And when we did say things it would come out wrong, be misunderstood. A loving comment could hurt, an insecure glance could make us shy and thrilled at the same time. A remark of criticism could fill us with tenderness. Some moments I could discover how truly banal she was. And it brough me great joy to wonder for myself why I even liked her. And it was exactly because everything was a little "wrong" that I loved her. I've never felt stronger love. Something being "wrong" matters. It being wrong means it matters. This is the stuff of poetry and art. It's also the stuff of comedy. Something always falling short of the ideal.
@@fromeveryting29 : Sir , please don't get this wrong. To me it is a sign of health being attracted to a 💃 without knowing why. And especially even mOre so when she's an ugly duckling. Nature is operating 80% on biochemical signaling 📶... Not on ideals of beauty. . . Visual symmetry as perceived is a criteria but pheromones can easily override that input. The genetic difference has to be maximum for healthy 👶👶👶.. Now imagine the role of cosmetics , perfumes and aftershaves which disturb the natural input and signaling via those hidden signals . No wonder that divorces are standard - maybe 🤔 Just a thesis / assumption.. Look , even Slavoij is married and he's not a G.Clooney type.. hehe Please don't feel criticised , me just described accordingly to my standard of knowledge. Maybe you've already experienced : The better she looks The less solid her character Go for intuition (belly 🦋) and if she smells and touches gOOD she's worth trying ! sail ⛵️ softly 👋.•°
The idea of not being aware of someone controlling your movement is terrifying, and thinking it’s your own will. I guess it’s the matrix but less zombie.
The thing is we never know why we do what we do. The things we are terrified that such a remote control can do to us, our brain already does them. Behind every decision we think we make, there are infinite number of (chemical, genetical, social) processes that make any other choice impossible, even when you think you were absolutely free and willing in your decision. The only difference is, these processes are random, a remote control wouldn't be. But it would be still a product of infinite random processes which determined it. Is there anything to do? Perhaps, but our urge to resist doesn't depend on free will either.
yes we are already controlled by existence , but being controlled by the script of nature is more pleasant than being controlled by unpredictable human made A.I
@@raindeer3428 Nature is not that predictable, unlike what we modern humans think. And who knows what is more pleasant, sometimes I wish there was some software that I can switch on to make me feel super motivated to finish my painful daily tasks. Imagine taking so much pleasure learning the details of piano so you can play complex concertos all day long. Our brain weaves pleasant narratives all the time, that's why we can totally forget about traumatic events, I'm sure we would enjoy it all the same, especially if we don't even know we are being controlled, just like now. Regardless of pain/pleasure, I'd like to question if it would be more destructive or better in the big picture. I'm not advocating it btw, I'm just familiar with the idea, as I read those rat experiments and its human implications a few years ago.
@@Apjooz That's pure conjecture, belief and, yes my friend, faith. "Looking into the void" and believing in determinism makes naïve people feel really deep and universal, when really they're just romanticizing their own lethargy and lack of intelligence.
I'm Studien physilosophie right now, best modern philosopher I know, he is every time baffling my mind with his way to see our world and still manages to laugh in between and make a comedy out of it. Life goals
Us being controlled by an agent and thinking we have free will is already happening to a lesser extent - no neuralink required. Our identities are stories we tell ourselves, but most of our motivations are subconscious and can easily be manipulated by algorithms. We rationalize our behavior after the fact. Also, people with hemispatial neglect are often unaware of their condition. Their minds sometimes come up with stories about why they can't interact with something on their left, which signals to me that the scenario where a person is being controlled but feels like they are in control is entirely possible.
Exactly this. I use to want Very Badly to think we had a shred of free will... Maybe I have less because of all the S*** I've been thru and still have going on lmao... but even if some people have a shred of freedom perhaps, it's far more an exception than the norm
Believing this BS is what will lead you into inner (if not outer) moral decay and inner despair. Stop blaming the universe. But know that perfection (according to God’s holiness) is impossible because you have already sinned against God (as we all have since the first man and woman in the Garden of Eden), which is why God sent His only Son to be the propitiation for our sin. The Bible says you can therefore come boldly before the throne of Grace based on Him and His love and forgiveness, not on your own perfection or self-righteousness, but under His. All you need is a change of heart. Turn to Him and ask Him for His forgiveness and accept Him and His word, which is faithful and true forever. We don’t need mankind to fix mankind. We only need to look upward to the One who is the Answer. A real Relationship with the Creator is spiritual and no technology can fabricate or synthesize that. Amen! ❤
@Simas Graliauskas Never thought about that. But if you look at Elon’s history, he has always said totally conflicting/complete opposite views on technology and other things. At least that’s what we SEE/HEAR. There is a lot of deep faking out there... body doubles...people saying this and that for political, financial or other security reasons. No telling. When someone like that has that much influence and money...I suppose anything is possible.
The idea of the 'clumsiness' of language brings to mind the pauses and 'errs' of the Google demo of the AI making a phone call. AI apes the 'error' of authenticity to enable the unsuspecting shop worker to think they are speaking to a real person...
@@VictoriaSobocki I think that - like how our walking gait is dictated by our anatomy - our speech and thinking are dictated by our brains and their sensory input. So imperfect speech sounds like what we're adapted to.
A human brain snd its relationship to the environment works in an entirely different manner than even deep learning, and hyper sophisticated AI. I think that’s the fundamental thing that cannot be fully captured. We do not even fully understand the nature and origin of human consciousness and sentience, but we have enough evidence to rule out it being a serious of quantum computing algorithms. And anyhow most of neuroscience is very much ab the basics, we are far from understanding how to measure and study let alone consensus on sentience.. whether it’s just produced within the brain or its an additional force, contingent upon action (ie Gibson) etc. we can still build scary shit but we can’t make an exactly human AI
The "Imperfections" of his physical appearance and tics makes him even more interesting and inspiring. And the conflict of his conclusions makes him genius 👏👏👏
@@VictoriaSobocki It is a Hegelian concept that things are only definable by their absence. Zizek gives a few examples, and the first one is about a film that seemed to be based on a much better story, but wasn't. The analogy is that abstract concepts seem to be based on something primal, before words to describe them. Zizek believes this not to be the case. The film is like the words, an expression of something, and the pre-verbal abstract concepts are the much better story behind them.
This reminds me of a movie, Ratatouille, where *sniff* precisely the reverse is portrayed - rat is controlling human to cook food, except here the control is purely motorical (by some stupid pulling of hair), so human is aware he is being controlled.
There's a little video of a rat getting veggies from a pot with water, not boiling, while the human stirs the pot with the hand the rat is climbing on to get his food and a chef hat held hovering over him humming ratatouille and so on and so on (It looks like the rats cooking stuff)
What he says about perfection goes very well with the thought of Utopia not existing. The distant ideal is never attainable. I first heard about this in the book "The Meaning of Landscape". I highly recommend!
think about how your phones and social media accounts are watched, scanned, and sold as information. now, imagine you access these things in your mind through neuralink. the ‘files’ are now your thoughts, and the information sold off is your fondest memories. i don’t wanna scare people man just please, don’t let this shit happen, say no
And even then there is still going to be that one idiot called Kane in the future who will take the chip without a question. I know who you are Kane...
This reminds me of a syndrome or something I forget the name of, where you're somehow disconnected from some part of your brain or something, and involuntarily do things that are fully perceived as your own actions. I hadn't even thought about it this way. That kind of power is the true essence of horror in many ways, and says a lot about human "free will." We really are just nature's storytellers.
youre thinking of anosognosia, and is a more broad word because it happens a lot of different ways. sometimes people with brain lesions are asked to move their paralyzed limb and they say "ok" and in their mind they moved it. its also the reason why schizophrenics are unaware of their delusions or hallucinations, it makes more intuitive sense calling it "lack of insight" in that case. even though theyre the same thing, its a lot easier to understand the unawareness of a simpler thing like moving your hand
I feel like sometimes people are so mesmerized by the idea itself(that would take everyone towards perfection), that they forgot the necessity of criticism and pointing out the worst case scenario which is in itself a fundamental practice in mathematics of game theory........like people realized the dangers of social media after social media became a necessary commodity for society........nonetheless really great perspective on perfectionism and language and how without language our thoughts are similar if not the same as animals with lower cognition......words give concepts a structure and make thinking beyond our natural/primitive ability possible. The idea itself to remove language from communication will rather compel humans to find new ways to lie and deceive than to inspire them to achieve greater truth.
I was thinking the same!!! You saw the musk interview in joe Rogan last week? OMG only a real philosopher can make the right questions in the right time!!! Amazing.. Ps For those who don't know just watch the 40 min of the musk interview with joe Rogan and how they fantasize and praise the neuro link without any criticism... zizek it's on point
I realize it could be more subtle changes, being applied to ones brain, that might be seen as ones own thoughts, but it might not be so bad in a situation where you research Viruses, and get direct access to relevant task oriented thoughts. A space of suggested neural pathways-(Other colleges/research papers thoughts) you can go down, (like a highly optimized version of how we are suggested words and sentences) that then can be montaged into your own task oriented approach to X- specific Virus-You'r team of colleagues are researching. (besides, it wouldn't bypass language, just think, and optimize towards a cleaner version of it, including senses, sights and sounds, being transferred directly, and other such interfaces with cells, tactile feelings, markers that objects connected to the internet of things might be characterized by, like this language of objects-The thoughts your brain might send out, without you'r knowledge of it-should be marked, and parked in an intermediary zone, compartmentalized, and deleted from this external system, if you wish for it to be so. That is to say, awaiting further exception before being send out to other systems.. It could be compromised, hacked, who would trust Neuralink with owning these external systems, yea, this is HIGHLY problematic for sure... and the risks involved with getting a computer interface outside of a milieu of other people using it also seems like an extremely dangerous thing to do, even thou Elon says it would be smart just to borrow some money, optimize your productivity with Neuralink, and pay it all back a short time later.. this seems like bad advice, and will probably throw a lot of people neck first into it, without having thinking it trough...)
I always hear people talking about what they will access and control by linking their mind to a machine/network. Never about how they could be accessed and controlled by whatever they intend to connect to.
Words are a prerequisite to categorize the experience and to reflect on the abstractions they imply and enable… but there is base emotional level of experience going back to the reptilian brain that is a precursor to most experiences involving us interpreting the world as symbols in the first place. This layer is always somehow connected to symbols we form in our lives. What is true is that language enables us to elevate experience into ever new layers of abstraction much like eruptions of the sun with some of them plummeting back into said base and connected layers to reemerge transformed later. Hence, it's not one or the other but rather a codependency of neurons firing and being fired and symbols being triggered to form new symbols in our minds. I totally agree that language is the common denominator to communicate these symbols and pass them on… but accessing experience on connected base layers to symbols might also work. That said, the implications of "free will" will be diminished and questioned once we reach that kind of access. The mind as a black box will become transparent by constantly mapping inputs (stimulus) to outputs (reaction, behavior) as a prerequisite to enable symbol transfer… this is the scary part. Once we allow this mapping not only do we allow the transfer of "desired" symbols as we must reveal our inner self ("get naked") to be a participant in this sort of communication. Hence, we will become vulnerable to hyper targeted manipulation. The question will arise how far we will take the brain interfaces of the future. Will a brain interface become a link into our perception only or will it have direct access to our emotional centers? Will the stimulation of symbols link directly into the higher brain functions or indirectly be interpreted through perception and emotion. Not sure if that makes a big difference but the first seams like it leaves no room for a subject to reject a perception as it is already processed and interpreted. Either way it remains a scary path to walk.
Having direct access to each other's brain might allow for some deeper sharing of the human experience or perception that could change how we see one another. Imagine the empathy you would feel by having a direct connection to another persons experience rather than just hearing the words of said experience.
I think he actually unknowingly questioned the existence of free will, or at least laid the foundation for the argument. What is the difference between a separate entity controlling your thoughts and basic physics controlling it? Btw not totally convinced that there's no free will but it is definitely a interesting and scary thought
In my own opinion, free will is emergent. I don’t think free will actually exists at the fundamental level, that could be either because everything is determined by the laws of physics, or even with quantum mechanics it could partly be controlled by probabilities, it’s not free will either way. However, at our level it can be considered free-will because that’s the most useful way to look at it and the most relevant to our daily lives if you aren’t a philosopher or scientist. However, when we introduce the prospects of AI or even certain diseases it’s somewhat different, something closer to our level of reality is influencing us and that is a threat to the definition of free-will that is relevant to us. That’s another way of looking at it, I suppose.
I think by now we should be certain that consciousness is a separate but still not fully independent entity from the brain (yes its connected in some manner and separated in some sense) ,only present to a sufficient level in humans and to some extent orangutans, it wouldn't make sense to go off a test made on a unconscious animal(basically a biological machine) and believe it would display the same effects on humans (who have a higher level of awareness ), even in animals u can see that when they are affected by a certain parasite(dont remember its name) which basically does the same thing as the scientists did to the rat ,they actively try to resist u see them walking in circles ,because the parasite comands their brain in one direction while the animal tries to go in another direction , if the animal wasnt aware that it wasnt trying to move in the direction the parasite tells it , it wouldn't have tried to go in the opposite way because the animal would've considered it as its own will and moved along. This is present even in ants affected by parasites so it would definitely be present in human beings.
how and where can we read the study that came to the conclusion that the one being remote controlled by a neuralink like device still feels they are moving of their own free will?
The whole thing would be terrifying. Imagine how dearly and sincerely people hold certain beliefs, political persuasion for example. Imagine linking to the brain of a nemesis and completely understanding their viewpoint and how depraved they actually are.
I get Zizek when he says thoughts don't exist prior to language and we think using language. But I am also confused then how language came into existence? If someone thinks only using words (which I think makes complete sense), didn't we need thinking to give rise to the language aka signifiers?
@sarath gopinath : here's my suggestion - Words are noises Birds sing Pigs grunt so on and so on ;) The primordial noise man made was a grunt pointing toward the 🐻 or the 🍎🌳 to inform his colleagues about ⚠️ danger or source of food. Mind (neuronal structure in the brain) is able to associate noises with things 🍎 🐻 and events 🚶 and memorize those in case of repeatedly reappearing occasions. Learning /memorizing comes into the field. Memorizing = Data comparison recognises : same event 🚶 same thing 🍎🐻 The birth of speech💬 tink 💭 That's why Zizek correctly said First speech (noise) 🎵 Then think 💭 All the noises, words and symbols🔣 we use , are passed down to us via education. Baby brabbles . . . Coordination of brabble is language. Absent coordinated noises , there can't be logically aligned sequence of experiences which are supplied by the memory data bank stored in the neuronal structure (brain , spinal cord , nerves). Modern man doesn't have single tink 💭 which he could call his own , albeit self-generated. The brain is an echo chamber repeating and reshuffling words and symbols🔣 over and over again. Creativity which you might tink 💭 of as novelty , is nothing but a re_formation of that which is already there in the memory bank in a different order or sequence. me dunno if i made this tink 💭 clear .•°
Yes but those people who gave rise to these signifiers were already in groups that were working on these signifiers. Those people who develop this particular language for use on these signifiers came from the education and stayed in the groups who did so. If we go by your logic, we would have been living in communist Utopia because everyone knows they do the work and employer sits on his chair to collect Profits. Since it’s quiet visible.
Obviously there are concepts for which there are no (spoken, written, or drawn) words, but that doesn't mean they are not in a language. A language is a system of symbols. Symbols represent things other then themselves. They are abstractions. The brain uses and manipulates abstraction. It therefore uses language. The internal symbols it uses are specific to the brain, not something that can be read out like a file by another brain. The transfer of esoteric information like that requires a firm of serialisation, an agreed upon language between the participating brains. That's why the direct brain-to-brain communication that Elon Musk is dreaming about is not possible. (It may be possible to take the output of a retina and plug it into someone else's visual cortex, because bionic eyes do almost exactly that. But it won't work for abstract thought, it won't even work for aural sensory inputs (the data rate from brain to ear is higher than from ear to brain). I still owe proof that each brain uses different symbols for internal representation, but I think that should be obvious. You can change your mind, you can change how you think about things, you can learn to recognise new concepts, and you can forget old ones. Obviously the internal semantics are changing over time, so if they are not the same within even one brain, how can they be the same in different ones?
In fact I wrote my master thesis about that topic two years ago. Considering newest research from top universities in the field of cognitive linguistic. Check out the term linguistic theory of relativity if you are interested. In overall no one in his right mind can claim or even dares to claim that he knows how human consciousness operates. This includes the relation between language and thought. But this in fact was a very interesting topic to 18th century philosophers. Today the same topic is recreated with empirical experiments but without any groundbreaking news.
@@DimljenaRiba I will , I'm in the process of writing my M.A thesis, M.A of applied linguistics, but universities are closed indefinitely in my country. yes, you are right no one can claim for certain but there are good arguments against the idea of thought only existing through the medium language.
@@DimljenaRiba Actually I know what that theory is. we call it Sapir-Whorf hypothesis here, I read a book that had a whole chapter mentioning observations that discredit this hypothesis, by Danny D. Steinberg and Natalia V. Sciarini Introduction to Psycholinguistics, its a good read, that theory doesnt hold up very well nowadays
Sturmgewehr 44 that’s one of the reasons I didn’t mention it as Sapir-whorf hypothesis. Because it’s immediately discredited by modern linguistics. But if you pay close attention most of modern cognitive linguistics would agree with quite a lot of it. Most problematic is the claim regarding time. Wharf claimed the hopi have no concept of time at all (at least in our western understanding). To be quite frank this I like the “particle physics” of linguistics. I’m also very attuned to psychology. Where (also depending on the scientists) 5 basic emotions are assumed. Every emotion has a specific social task and communicates a certain need. So there you have a sort of communication without language. And emotions are mostly coded in the limbic system of the brain whereas language is part of the neocortex. Than again - don’t forget about the amygdala and the reptilian part of our brains. All of this is communication. But... language itself is also hardwired into our brain and it interacts with all parts of our brain - for example psychotherapy. I could go endless. My main point is that no matter how hard you try you can’t possibly eliminate language in relation to thoughts. And depending on the structure of the language it shapes your thoughts. Just check out (I forgot the name) a Australian Aboriginal tribe. They don’t have an egocentric orientation in space but a geocentric. Meaning, they don’t use concepts like “left” or “right” check it out, you will be amazed! And good luck with your thesis. It will definitely change your worldview, really good choice! ;)
It is maybe not everyone like this but in general in our culture (I am also Slovene) I think there really is a big gap between coumucating to another person and thinking ... and I think it's not neceseraly a bad thing. It's probably really really complex like Zizek is trying to explain. And it's really obvious even he has a problem to make it clear. I dont belive this thing will work. It is probably going to be disaster. To think a bit more general even how much we know for example about brain and a vision: we don't even know how the certain kinds of birds find their exact way from north to south. They find the exact nest. Just think about this! And even this happens: if the nest isn't there anymore they would still come but when they come to that point they don't at first get that the nest isn't there. They try they check, check again... Than you have this hypothesis about how their eyes use quantum entanglement principle so they envision earth's magnetic field. Than u make some more research and try to understand quantum entanglement than you realise that even the best scientists don't agree on it. Global warming is much more certain thing than for example this thing... so... Im really sure: This brain wiring will lead to nowhere. Newralink is big waste of time maybe they will use it as a repression of sorts (maybe some goverments) but who would want that ? Why not just fry the brain like in the old times ?
Thank you for uploading. I had the chance to see a rocket launch in 2018. Unbelievable experience. I shared a pretty cool video of the journey to my channel.
As Derrida has taught us, just interpreting a text can already be extremely subjective and unreliable, and the whole point of a text is to convey a decoded and curated version one's own impressions - both sensory and cognitive- in the first place, so if that's already this hard to do successfully imagine being bombarded by the whole spectrum of somebody's unfiltered or less filtered mental processes, even if only for a moment and at the sender's will. Communication has already turned for the worse thanks to hyperfast messaging and the expectation to go brainfart-to-keyboard as quickly as possible. Getting a Neuralink connection running would probably feel like a mix between a waking dream and epileptic seizure. And ironically, if humanity were to be able to adapt, overcome and learn to codify and decode modes of telepathic communication cleanly it would inadvertently create an intersection that is again separate from pure thought and functioning just like language was in the first place, so what's the fucking point? I dunno about you guys, maybe I'm just autistic or somehow brain-damaged, but when I want to put a storm of thoughts and impressions into a coherently processable pattern they already show down so significantly that it wouldn't be much extra effort to speak then out loudly.
When the technology snowballs out of control, not even our thoughts will be private. Our minds will be our privacy's last stand and you know corporations will be ready to collect the data the moment it happens.
I think Elon has addressed this himself, it quite literally will be like talking. So there would be no difference. As to ask whats the point? There really is none, communicating through this means is just a perk. The actual substance of neural link is not about this communication to other people, but rather our ability to communicate to technology. Elon's vision is to create something that makes humans and tech essentially one, because he envisions a world where tech will either become us or rule over us.
@@VictoriaSobocki Yeh it's the one where the husband goes through his wife's memory to find out if she was cheating. All I remember from that episode lol.
It's a thing that literally attached to the inside of your pupils when it comes out it's like a reversed tape measurer some pain your perception completely changes it's like an assemblage of fractals that flies away and calls you a piece of shit
Why would the intermediate layers be lost? Would they have to be? If all psychic life, including the 'intermediate layers' like language, are essentially physical, as Neuralink of course presupposes, then nothing would have to be lost.
His ramblings quoted here also sound like an episode of Black Mirror, especially the one with the memory storage implants (S1e3 IIRC), which of course end _very_ badly.
Oh yeah the electric machine revolutionare, current best space exploration company owner, neuralink owner, digging tunnels for revolutionazed travel guy has been memed by some people
@AIFAHRA HORGGHROIs revolutionising finance banking industry, space flight, automobile industry isnt enough for you? Like every other companies CEO he introduces his company products. Can you show me any evidence where he claimed i invented it personally?. Yeah some cultists are stupid but that doesnt mean he is a revolutionar
Agreed, some stones should remain unturned.. THAT is the biggest (IMO) contribution of the religion (though people may not like it) throughout the last 1000 or so years. THAT and the ability to overthrow dictators by "bringing" the masses together when someone does that in an obviously bad manner Digging deep without having the sense/knowledge of the "recipient" side is a matter of extreme danger
I am not sure would I agree with speech being a bottleneck for "high-bandwidth" communication through the neuralink interface, or the problem of two human beings thinking in separate language when trying to communicate via that channel. Regarding separate languages, it's the same problem as with speech communication, both persons need to learn the same language. Regarding the speed, there was some research of the "inner speech" - our private language that we use while we are thinking (and unconsciously moving vocal chords while doing it), and it shown that it is heavily optimized, throwing away all the unnecessary stuff, barely resembling the speech that we hear when opening our mouths - so although we speak and thing in the same language, thinking is much faster. My point is, there could be artificially constructed language, serving as a protocol if we wanna get technical, that could be very optimized for the "neuralink communication channel" allowing us to transfer the thoughts pretty quickly and accurately. Step further - that language is not bound to our ability to reproduce it vocally, so it can use sounds that we are not able to produce with our speech organs :) You could think for example just in pure tones, where frequency and other tone characteristics would be the basic phonemes - basically we could talk to each others and to computer interfaces via means of singing, whistling, playing a song :)
At 6:30, he speaks of thoughts not existing prior to words, but that just isn't the case. Animals can not speak, but they do think. Humans did not always have language. That was something they had to develop over time, but they did have thoughts prior to it. We're just very used to using language, because the vast majority of us haven't lived a life without it. But other creatures do and our ancestors did. Just as we learned language over time, we can also unlearn it as it stops being necessary, paving the way for a superior form of communication. Not only communicating words, but also feelings and intent. An alien concept to us now, but a couple centuries from now, our descendants may scoff at our primitive and inefficient use of verbal communication.
I think *How language shapes the way we think | Lera Boroditsky* as one of the more recent videos on youtube covers some of the things you are saying with some examples too, of how different languages developed in different parts of the world are sometimes very different to usual languages and cause the users so think differently. Just how a simple picture of a color pallet can show how people think differently in languages that have a different number of names for colors or maybe no word at all for some, it will be very interesting to see what deeper gaps created in normal translation/communication that this technology will help close in the future.
I bet we are, and we don't even know it. Now it would be nice for Neuraling to work for us...to return the favor. Reminds me 'bout the relationship with this brain of mine (and some of other relationships I had...hehe) :D
Brain regions are similarly mapped across humans and neural activity maps light up in a similar pattern given similar visual and auditory stimuli. Neural networks must learn your unique pattern of hand writing or your particular facial structure but does so from a general training set then finds your unique details. Experience may be generalizable to an extent then translated to your particular neural mapping. Not sure the jury is out on that yet as not being possible.
It is wrong to say that you cannot actually get to the experience in its raw form without words. "I love you" is not actually the experience and there are many examples and proof that show the limitation of the over reliance on words.
Artificial Intelligence is a misnomer coined as a joke and as a marketeers dream but if you can convince any humans that your computer is more intelligent than them you will have them in your pocket.
They don't just want your Service and the Currency that your Service garner$ ; they want to at least know what you're thinking too which will include the greatest data mining of ideas we have seen yet.
I think by now we should be certain that consciousness is a separate but still not fully independent entity from the brain (yes its connected in some manner and separated in some sense) ,only present to a sufficient level in humans and to some extent orangutans, it wouldn't make sense to go off a test made on a unconscious animal(basically a biological machine) and believe it would display the same effects on humans (who have a higher level of awareness ), even in animals u can see that when they are affected by a certain parasite(dont remember its name) which basically does the same thing as the scientists did to the rat ,they actively try to resist u see them walking in circles ,because the parasite comands their brain in one direction while the animal tries to go in another direction , if the animal wasnt aware that it wasnt trying to move in the direction the parasite tells it , it wouldn't have tried to go in the opposite way because the animal would've considered it as its own will and moved along. This is present even in ants affected by parasites so it would definitely be present in human beings.
My primary intuition is that such technologies are not possible at least in an effective way, but if we can control quantum particles and use them for our purposes, probably this one too would become possible. But possibility aside, there're questions about implications. Slavoj discusses those implications. However, it's quite obvious that organisms adapt to everything, not only body but the psyche adapts itself as well. For a simple example, just think about this: the lifestyle that was unimaginable (not in terms of possibilities, but in terms of living such life) is now common. And the newer generation is fine with it. Of course during the transition times, there are ups and downs. However, my concern is for people who cannot adapt to such changes. They would feel more and more disconnected with the existence. For them it would only get worse.
Agree. Most people are gonna be ok with this idea. But I tell you as a software developer myself I would not trust anyone or piece of code with my brain the organ I heavely depend on for my life. You shouldn't too. Especilly if u have no control over such technology. Elon musk is fine.... tats his company, his tech. Point is he has control should anything go wrong. As for u nd the rest of the world daaah
I'm not sure I agree with his point on language. He says your thoughts are basically no deeper than the language in which you think them, and that there is no experience of a thought outside of the familiar linguistic scripts you run in your mind. I would argue that you have to mean something in order to have an idea for speech. Even before your mind may think a sentence in English, there's an intention you set out to express before it gets translated into language. From that perspective, language is a sloppy, imprecise vector for experience and intention, and it would be ideal to bypass it if possible by having people communicate without the abstract middle ground where misunderstandings can happen.
I disagree with you. I believe that language being articulate with your language and the way you use it is a form of an art in itself. There are quotes from people who are portrayed as the "Great minds" that appear , at least to me, better than the actual image or concept behind them because they are closer to perfection than the actual abstract concept that is transmitted through them.
@@vasimalsalibi4729 My point isn't that language can't be artistic or well crafted. That's just not the main purpose of language, which is clear communication and understanding; transmitting an intention to facilitate cooperation and organization. Telling your caveman buddy to get firewood when he's on his walk so he doesn't come back with blueberries, thinking you meant for him to get food, when the daylight is already fading and there's no time to get more wood or enough wood to build a fire. Having an interesting perspective come out of linguistic devices, like Eskimos calling a clock "artificial sun," is an happy bonus. Ultimately, language diversity is a disaster unless there are few enough languages globally that everyone can learn them all. There are 6500 right now. You could maybe be fluent in 10 if you really studied throughout your whole young life, but I'd doubt the depth of your understanding of academic levels of any of them in that case.
6:23 Strong disagree. When we realise we need to brush our teeth, the concept arises in our mind. We can go to the bathroom and go through the whole process without thinking "teeth", "brush", "mirror", and so on.
I have a feeling that he would have his mind blown if he got to see what some of the more advanced AI can do today when combined with some of the most basic marketing strategies used for more than half a century now. I understand that he's very smart, has probably read a huge amount too, but this just sounds like a smart man that hasn't kept pace with modern research and technology. Eg. listen to the final part 16:28 -> 19:45 and then research a little about how Cambridge Analytica harvested data and how it could be (and was) used to do the things that, he seems to believe, are only possible by using direct brain implants. This in contrast to what he says in the same video a short while earlier 1:37 -> 2:10. Communication continues to change as technology progresses. Humans could influence other humans using language, this was dependent on how resistent(receiver)/skilled(talker) was. The rules moved when drawing was developed and people could share more information faster with more people, but with a middle man, the artist drawing the picture. Moved again later on after video cameras were developed and people could just go "well, I can describe it to you, you will have to use your imagination for that, I could also draw it and you would have to use your imagination again but a little less, but now i can just show you", this reduced some of the ability of the one recording and sharing again but increased the information quantity Moved again after people could share optical recordings, reducing even more the recording's creator touch but again (probably) increasing quality and quantity. People didn't stop talking when drawing was invented, they didn't stop drawing or taking pictures when video was invented, etc., people didn't start only using one language when they learned two and one of them was simply better for a specific task. There were simply more ways for people to communicate, better ways to do specific things (eg. 13:08, he could have said *i love you in writing, or through a phone-call, but the best way was still face to face with words and maybe a kiss), and also more ways for people to control one-another (eg. warnings, posters, product placements in tv/movies, targeted political advertising) but also more ways to move one-another (eg. epics, drama, fiction, dances, recipes, paintings, sculptures, pictures, movies). Developing another language, that could be faster, more specific and easier to use will only replace other means of communication if said other means don't cover their niche use enough to warrant their preservation with continuous use.
I think you missed the fundamental expects of what he was saying. taking your example of saying something or showing him the recording of it. what we do is presuming that showing recording is superior in every expects while it is not. Like I could tell you about how my day went or show you the recording of my day, we can't simply say recording>my explanation as my explanation add stuff you can't see in the recordings
@@siddhan10able - I'm sorry, I do not understand what Siddhant Gupta -"fundamental expects of what he was saying" means. - Siddhant Gupta -"superior in every **expects** while it is not" oooh, I get it now. - Siddhant Gupta -"presuming that showing recording is superior in every expects" Kmykzy -"this **reduced some of the ability** of the one recording and sharing again **but increased the information quantity**" Kmykzy -"There were simply more ways for people to communicate, **better ways to do specific things**" Kmykzy -"Developing another language, that could be **faster, more specific and easier to use** will only replace other means of communication **if said other means don't cover their niche** use enough to warrant their preservation with continuous use." - Siddhant Gupta -"my explanation as my explanation add stuff you can't see in the recordings" I think you just mean adding context. I might be wrong but I think you can do this in video form too.
Great lecture, however I disagree that we ‘think’ in words. We ‘think and conceptualize’ in ‘images/pictures/colors’. Words or languages is purely an attempt to convey or communicate those images. Seems simple enough.
Be careful with the "We". You don't know how other people "think". Some have a voice in their head narrative their thoughs. Some have colorful pictures. Some have black'n'white pictures. Some have picture perfect pictures and some have blurr "intention" pictures, etc... and so on and so on. My doctor of a father told me : "we are as different inside as we are different outside". Altough he was refering to the pure biology of the body, this can be applied to the thinking process too
@@Fabzil have you ever had a moment where you wished to express something but could not explain it in words? Then you had to think harder to formulate the correct way to express that thought in words? Is this not proof that we can form complex thoughts without words?
![Science, Belief and Coffee - Slavoj Žižek [2011] | Intelligence Squared](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/unoBj_MTdM8/mqdefault.jpg)
![Science, Belief and Coffee - Slavoj Žižek [2011] | Intelligence Squared](/img/tr.png)
If you want to get Zizek's 'I WOULD PREFER NOT TO' t-shirt you can do so here:
i-would-prefer-not-to.com
my favourite part of this video is google thinking zizek's speaking dutch
Tbh im dutch and he kinda does sound like a dutch person with a severe common cold (probably just his accent + his sniffing)
Oh fuck it's too good
😂😂
EXACTLY LMFAO
Zizek is my hero
I like Zizek and so on and so on you know
Sylwester Klimowicz *sniff*
Precisely
Best comment
He is right. It seems to me, every part of my life full of passion and meaning are really full of problems, imperfection and tension.
I was madly in love with this woman some time back. And she was utterly imperfect. Some of her annoyed me, some of her angered me. I disagreed with her and had internal discussions with her every day. We were extremely clumsy. We could always sense that the other was about to say something, but holding it back in fear. And when we did say things it would come out wrong, be misunderstood. A loving comment could hurt, an insecure glance could make us shy and thrilled at the same time. A remark of criticism could fill us with tenderness.
Some moments I could discover how truly banal she was. And it brough me great joy to wonder for myself why I even liked her. And it was exactly because everything was a little "wrong" that I loved her. I've never felt stronger love. Something being "wrong" matters. It being wrong means it matters.
This is the stuff of poetry and art. It's also the stuff of comedy. Something always falling short of the ideal.
Maybe you felt the dissonance between the idea of a perfected spouse and what your hormones determined - which is the usual misunderstanding .
🤔 .•°
@@farrider3339 maybe :I
@@fromeveryting29 : Sir , please don't get this wrong.
To me it is a sign of health being attracted to a 💃 without knowing why.
And especially even mOre so when she's an ugly duckling.
Nature is operating 80% on biochemical signaling 📶...
Not on ideals of beauty. . .
Visual symmetry as perceived is a criteria but pheromones can easily override that input.
The genetic difference has to be maximum for healthy 👶👶👶..
Now imagine the role of cosmetics , perfumes and aftershaves which disturb the natural input and signaling via those hidden signals .
No wonder that divorces are standard - maybe 🤔
Just a thesis / assumption..
Look , even Slavoij is married and he's not a G.Clooney type..
hehe
Please don't feel criticised , me just described accordingly to my standard of knowledge.
Maybe you've already experienced :
The better she looks
The less solid her character
Go for intuition (belly 🦋) and if she smells and touches gOOD she's worth trying !
sail ⛵️ softly 👋.•°
@@farrider3339 I think you are onto something :)
So how did it end?
One Zizek a day keeps the doctor away..
Two Zizek a day keeps Capitalism at bay
I munch on it every four days or so.
@@SuperMarioTomma95 if Capitalism causes the sickness, psychiatry is the band-aid. This is the holistic remedy.
Mario Tomasoni Your on youtube lol
@@jessequest8575 what do you mean?
18:43 The quote: "Human beings are not rational, but rationalizing" comes to mind.
The idea of not being aware of someone controlling your movement is terrifying, and thinking it’s your own will. I guess it’s the matrix but less zombie.
Something always controls us, we have no more freedom to act than any chemical process has. So yeah. Hope this helps I guess.
The thing is we never know why we do what we do. The things we are terrified that such a remote control can do to us, our brain already does them. Behind every decision we think we make, there are infinite number of (chemical, genetical, social) processes that make any other choice impossible, even when you think you were absolutely free and willing in your decision. The only difference is, these processes are random, a remote control wouldn't be. But it would be still a product of infinite random processes which determined it. Is there anything to do? Perhaps, but our urge to resist doesn't depend on free will either.
yes we are already controlled by existence , but being controlled by the script of nature is more pleasant than being controlled by unpredictable human made A.I
@@raindeer3428 Nature is not that predictable, unlike what we modern humans think. And who knows what is more pleasant, sometimes I wish there was some software that I can switch on to make me feel super motivated to finish my painful daily tasks. Imagine taking so much pleasure learning the details of piano so you can play complex concertos all day long. Our brain weaves pleasant narratives all the time, that's why we can totally forget about traumatic events, I'm sure we would enjoy it all the same, especially if we don't even know we are being controlled, just like now. Regardless of pain/pleasure, I'd like to question if it would be more destructive or better in the big picture. I'm not advocating it btw, I'm just familiar with the idea, as I read those rat experiments and its human implications a few years ago.
@@Apjooz That's pure conjecture, belief and, yes my friend, faith. "Looking into the void" and believing in determinism makes naïve people feel really deep and universal, when really they're just romanticizing their own lethargy and lack of intelligence.
I'm Studien physilosophie right now, best modern philosopher I know, he is every time baffling my mind with his way to see our world and still manages to laugh in between and make a comedy out of it. Life goals
Modern Jester
The flirtacious lady is Zisek's number one humblebrag.
Interesting term, I'll look it up. We'd call her a blowrag or not call her at all.
old lady*
You think Zizek need to brag about his girlz ?
Hahaha a bit
You must be a lonely internet politics section incel
Us being controlled by an agent and thinking we have free will is already happening to a lesser extent - no neuralink required. Our identities are stories we tell ourselves, but most of our motivations are subconscious and can easily be manipulated by algorithms. We rationalize our behavior after the fact. Also, people with hemispatial neglect are often unaware of their condition. Their minds sometimes come up with stories about why they can't interact with something on their left, which signals to me that the scenario where a person is being controlled but feels like they are in control is entirely possible.
Exactly this. I use to want Very Badly to think we had a shred of free will... Maybe I have less because of all the S*** I've been thru and still have going on lmao... but even if some people have a shred of freedom perhaps, it's far more an exception than the norm
Believing this BS is what will lead you into inner (if not outer) moral decay and inner despair. Stop blaming the universe. But know that perfection (according to God’s holiness) is impossible because you have already sinned against God (as we all have since the first man and woman in the Garden of Eden), which is why God sent His only Son to be the propitiation for our sin. The Bible says you can therefore come boldly before the throne of Grace based on Him and His love and forgiveness, not on your own perfection or self-righteousness, but under His. All you need is a change of heart. Turn to Him and ask Him for His forgiveness and accept Him and His word, which is faithful and true forever. We don’t need mankind to fix mankind. We only need to look upward to the One who is the Answer. A real Relationship with the Creator is spiritual and no technology can fabricate or synthesize that. Amen! ❤
@Simas Graliauskas Never thought about that. But if you look at Elon’s history, he has always said totally conflicting/complete opposite views on technology and other things. At least that’s what we SEE/HEAR. There is a lot of deep faking out there... body doubles...people saying this and that for political, financial or other security reasons. No telling. When someone like that has that much influence and money...I suppose anything is possible.
The idea of the 'clumsiness' of language brings to mind the pauses and 'errs' of the Google demo of the AI making a phone call. AI apes the 'error' of authenticity to enable the unsuspecting shop worker to think they are speaking to a real person...
100%. Errors... make us human?
@@VictoriaSobocki I think that - like how our walking gait is dictated by our anatomy - our speech and thinking are dictated by our brains and their sensory input. So imperfect speech sounds like what we're adapted to.
A human brain snd its relationship to the environment works in an entirely different manner than even deep learning, and hyper sophisticated AI. I think that’s the fundamental thing that cannot be fully captured. We do not even fully understand the nature and origin of human consciousness and sentience, but we have enough evidence to rule out it being a serious of quantum computing algorithms. And anyhow most of neuroscience is very much ab the basics, we are far from understanding how to measure and study let alone consensus on sentience.. whether it’s just produced within the brain or its an additional force, contingent upon action (ie Gibson) etc. we can still build scary shit but we can’t make an exactly human AI
The "Imperfections" of his physical appearance and tics makes him even more interesting and inspiring. And the conflict of his conclusions makes him genius 👏👏👏
Precisely his accent and shaking makes him so interesting to hear.
No no no
You appear to have some pretty serious issues. Try eating a little shit and get back to us.
I find that what he says, rather than how he says it, makes it so interesting.
@@martin8313 Agree
@@martin8313 Or at least that's what you think
That notion about "dirct thought" being an illusion like the impression of a good movie in between two bad adaptations was friggin awesome.
I don’t think I quite got that bit :(
@@VictoriaSobocki It is a Hegelian concept that things are only definable by their absence.
Zizek gives a few examples, and the first one is about a film that seemed to be based on a much better story, but wasn't.
The analogy is that abstract concepts seem to be based on something primal, before words to describe them. Zizek believes this not to be the case.
The film is like the words, an expression of something, and the pre-verbal abstract concepts are the much better story behind them.
The last point he made is bone chillingly frightening
Two most famous Slovenians: Melania Trump and Slavoj Zizek.. What a contrast..😂
Luka Dončić is more!
celpabedn Oh.. I see, I thought he was a Serb..🤔😁
Match made in heaven, we can only hope that Baron is the lovechild of Melania and Slavoj and is currently learning how to use the force.
Shane Lee Thank you for pointing that out.. 😁
At lease he speaks two Languages how many do u speak beside that shitty English language lol
This reminds me of a movie, Ratatouille, where *sniff* precisely the reverse is portrayed - rat is controlling human to cook food, except here the control is purely motorical (by some stupid pulling of hair), so human is aware he is being controlled.
Smells like an essay
I really want a zizekian video essay of ratatouille now
There's a little video of a rat getting veggies from a pot with water, not boiling, while the human stirs the pot with the hand the rat is climbing on to get his food and a chef hat held hovering over him humming ratatouille and so on and so on
(It looks like the rats cooking stuff)
What he says about perfection goes very well with the thought of Utopia not existing. The distant ideal is never attainable. I first heard about this in the book "The Meaning of Landscape". I highly recommend!
Every time I hear this guy talk he says what I believe to be true. He knows what he's talking about.
I ageee everytime he talks, thats how i know he's telling truth!
think about how your phones and social media accounts are watched, scanned, and sold as information. now, imagine you access these things in your mind through neuralink. the ‘files’ are now your thoughts, and the information sold off is your fondest memories. i don’t wanna scare people man just please, don’t let this shit happen, say no
And even then there is still going to be that one idiot called Kane in the future who will take the chip without a question. I know who you are Kane...
Millions of people are putting Amazon Alexas in their home without hesitation. There is no turning back.
This reminds me of a syndrome or something I forget the name of, where you're somehow disconnected from some part of your brain or something, and involuntarily do things that are fully perceived as your own actions. I hadn't even thought about it this way. That kind of power is the true essence of horror in many ways, and says a lot about human "free will." We really are just nature's storytellers.
youre thinking of anosognosia, and is a more broad word because it happens a lot of different ways. sometimes people with brain lesions are asked to move their paralyzed limb and they say "ok" and in their mind they moved it. its also the reason why schizophrenics are unaware of their delusions or hallucinations, it makes more intuitive sense calling it "lack of insight" in that case. even though theyre the same thing, its a lot easier to understand the unawareness of a simpler thing like moving your hand
I want a Zizek/Elon interview so badly.. wish Joe Rogan knew of Slavoj, he would definitely have him on
depression is for the rich what do you mean?
That would break internet... maybe reality itself.
I kinda have a feeling Zizek has been invited but declined
I want a Zizek, Jay Dyer debate !
He most certainly knows of Slavoj, but such a guest would probably not be accepted on the show.
If Zizek would have neuralink installed in his brain, and someone remotely orders him not to touch his nose, Zizek would rise up in revolt!
Even if I know that he spits like an open fire hydrant I want to hug him like a fluffy teddy bear of knowledge
That just shows he is not a computer but actual human 😀
i was so hyped to watch this video but he only talked about few things
who said that we gonna skip language with this thing?
So we're back at descartes and on a deeper level.
Yes.
well that ended on a scary note
I feel like sometimes people are so mesmerized by the idea itself(that would take everyone towards perfection), that they forgot the necessity of criticism and pointing out the worst case scenario which is in itself a fundamental practice in mathematics of game theory........like people realized the dangers of social media after social media became a necessary commodity for society........nonetheless really great perspective on perfectionism and language and how without language our thoughts are similar if not the same as animals with lower cognition......words give concepts a structure and make thinking beyond our natural/primitive ability possible. The idea itself to remove language from communication will rather compel humans to find new ways to lie and deceive than to inspire them to achieve greater truth.
What a timing!
I was thinking the same!!! You saw the musk interview in joe Rogan last week? OMG only a real philosopher can make the right questions in the right time!!! Amazing..
Ps For those who don't know just watch the 40 min of the musk interview with joe Rogan and how they fantasize and praise the neuro link without any criticism... zizek it's on point
I realize it could be more subtle changes, being applied to ones brain, that might be seen as ones own thoughts, but it might not be so bad in a situation where you research Viruses, and get direct access to relevant task oriented thoughts. A space of suggested neural pathways-(Other colleges/research papers thoughts) you can go down, (like a highly optimized version of how we are suggested words and sentences) that then can be montaged into your own task oriented approach to X- specific Virus-You'r team of colleagues are researching. (besides, it wouldn't bypass language, just think, and optimize towards a cleaner version of it, including senses, sights and sounds, being transferred directly, and other such interfaces with cells, tactile feelings, markers that objects connected to the internet of things might be characterized by, like this language of objects-The thoughts your brain might send out, without you'r knowledge of it-should be marked, and parked in an intermediary zone, compartmentalized, and deleted from this external system, if you wish for it to be so. That is to say, awaiting further exception before being send out to other systems.. It could be compromised, hacked, who would trust Neuralink with owning these external systems, yea, this is HIGHLY problematic for sure... and the risks involved with getting a computer interface outside of a milieu of other people using it also seems like an extremely dangerous thing to do, even thou Elon says it would be smart just to borrow some money, optimize your productivity with Neuralink, and pay it all back a short time later.. this seems like bad advice, and will probably throw a lot of people neck first into it, without having thinking it trough...)
@10:15 "See the positive generating aspect of imperfection." Yessir!
somebody make this man watch ghost in the shell
You say that like it's a bad future
@@ShiroNekoDen its a redic future
I always hear people talking about what they will access and control by linking their mind to a machine/network. Never about how they could be accessed and controlled by whatever they intend to connect to.
Words are a prerequisite to categorize the experience and to reflect on the abstractions they imply and enable… but there is base emotional level of experience going back to the reptilian brain that is a precursor to most experiences involving us interpreting the world as symbols in the first place. This layer is always somehow connected to symbols we form in our lives. What is true is that language enables us to elevate experience into ever new layers of abstraction much like eruptions of the sun with some of them plummeting back into said base and connected layers to reemerge transformed later. Hence, it's not one or the other but rather a codependency of neurons firing and being fired and symbols being triggered to form new symbols in our minds. I totally agree that language is the common denominator to communicate these symbols and pass them on… but accessing experience on connected base layers to symbols might also work. That said, the implications of "free will" will be diminished and questioned once we reach that kind of access. The mind as a black box will become transparent by constantly mapping inputs (stimulus) to outputs (reaction, behavior) as a prerequisite to enable symbol transfer… this is the scary part. Once we allow this mapping not only do we allow the transfer of "desired" symbols as we must reveal our inner self ("get naked") to be a participant in this sort of communication. Hence, we will become vulnerable to hyper targeted manipulation. The question will arise how far we will take the brain interfaces of the future. Will a brain interface become a link into our perception only or will it have direct access to our emotional centers? Will the stimulation of symbols link directly into the higher brain functions or indirectly be interpreted through perception and emotion. Not sure if that makes a big difference but the first seams like it leaves no room for a subject to reject a perception as it is already processed and interpreted. Either way it remains a scary path to walk.
what kind of food are you on, give me some
I read poetry, what a great comment.
Having direct access to each other's brain might allow for some deeper sharing of the human experience or perception that could change how we see one another. Imagine the empathy you would feel by having a direct connection to another persons experience rather than just hearing the words of said experience.
my limbic system and the youtube algorithm agreed on making me watch this video
heheh...
there was the void, and "Hello world" was written!
Conclusion delivered in the last minutes of the video is thought-provoking.
I think he actually unknowingly questioned the existence of free will, or at least laid the foundation for the argument. What is the difference between a separate entity controlling your thoughts and basic physics controlling it? Btw not totally convinced that there's no free will but it is definitely a interesting and scary thought
Sometimes it does feel this what he just said has already happened.. I agree with you
There isn't free will, only class struggle.
In my own opinion, free will is emergent. I don’t think free will actually exists at the fundamental level, that could be either because everything is determined by the laws of physics, or even with quantum mechanics it could partly be controlled by probabilities, it’s not free will either way. However, at our level it can be considered free-will because that’s the most useful way to look at it and the most relevant to our daily lives if you aren’t a philosopher or scientist. However, when we introduce the prospects of AI or even certain diseases it’s somewhat different, something closer to our level of reality is influencing us and that is a threat to the definition of free-will that is relevant to us. That’s another way of looking at it, I suppose.
The difference is that physics does not want to instrumentalise you for its own purposes.
I think by now we should be certain that consciousness is a separate but still not fully independent entity from the brain (yes its connected in some manner and separated in some sense) ,only present to a sufficient level in humans and to some extent orangutans, it wouldn't make sense to go off a test made on a unconscious animal(basically a biological machine) and believe it would display the same effects on humans (who have a higher level of awareness ), even in animals u can see that when they are affected by a certain parasite(dont remember its name) which basically does the same thing as the scientists did to the rat ,they actively try to resist u see them walking in circles ,because the parasite comands their brain in one direction while the animal tries to go in another direction , if the animal wasnt aware that it wasnt trying to move in the direction the parasite tells it , it wouldn't have tried to go in the opposite way because the animal would've considered it as its own will and moved along. This is present even in ants affected by parasites so it would definitely be present in human beings.
This has even brought more questions to my mind
I would really like to hear a conversation on post-humanism between slavoj žižek and rosi braidotti
Such a technology (as Mr. Musk espouses), I feel, would be more likely to change our thoughts than to reveal them.
Populizer, simplifier, ...
I like his adjectives. 🎯
A dystopian cyberpunk future is what we're ultimately headed towards.
No - Cyberpunk is it's own thing. It wouldn't make sense in real life, either.
ZIZEK No1
We don't make mistakes, we just have happy accidents. - famous Hegelian Bob Ross
This is why Zizek writes with one finger on a computer keyboard.
I'd love to see a conversation between him and Whitney Webb.
He keeps all his philosophy in his nose.
😅😅🤣
how and where can we read the study that came to the conclusion that the one being remote controlled by a neuralink like device still feels they are moving of their own free will?
Me tink it is an assumption based on logical conclusions by researchers .•°
So basically... Ghost in the Shell lol
One glitch in the system later..
"WE ARE BORG"
The whole thing would be terrifying. Imagine how dearly and sincerely people hold certain beliefs, political persuasion for example. Imagine linking to the brain of a nemesis and completely understanding their viewpoint and how depraved they actually are.
yea this could be bad.
But still, the this technology is an amazing advancement for humanity.
There will be countermeasures.
@@lordrefrigeratorintercoole288 or it's a mechanism for a technocratic government to take complete control of everybody everywhere
I get Zizek when he says thoughts don't exist prior to language and we think using language. But I am also confused then how language came into existence? If someone thinks only using words (which I think makes complete sense), didn't we need thinking to give rise to the language aka signifiers?
@sarath gopinath : here's my suggestion -
Words are noises
Birds sing
Pigs grunt
so on and so on ;)
The primordial noise man made was a grunt pointing toward the 🐻 or the 🍎🌳 to inform his colleagues about ⚠️ danger or source of food.
Mind (neuronal structure in the brain) is able to associate noises with things 🍎 🐻 and events 🚶 and memorize those in case of repeatedly reappearing occasions.
Learning /memorizing comes into the field.
Memorizing =
Data comparison recognises :
same event 🚶
same thing 🍎🐻
The birth of
speech💬
tink 💭
That's why Zizek correctly said
First speech (noise) 🎵
Then think 💭
All the noises, words and symbols🔣 we use , are passed down to us via education.
Baby brabbles . . .
Coordination of brabble is language.
Absent coordinated noises , there can't be logically aligned sequence of experiences which are supplied by the memory data bank stored in the neuronal structure (brain , spinal cord , nerves).
Modern man doesn't have single tink 💭 which he could call his own , albeit self-generated.
The brain is an echo chamber repeating and reshuffling words and symbols🔣 over and over again.
Creativity which you might tink 💭 of as novelty , is nothing but a re_formation of that which is already there in the memory bank in a different order or sequence.
me dunno if i made this tink 💭 clear .•°
Yes but those people who gave rise to these signifiers were already in groups that were working on these signifiers. Those people who develop this particular language for use on these signifiers came from the education and stayed in the groups who did so.
If we go by your logic, we would have been living in communist Utopia because everyone knows they do the work and employer sits on his chair to collect Profits. Since it’s quiet visible.
@@farrider3339 What noise does your written comment make?
Obviously there are concepts for which there are no (spoken, written, or drawn) words, but that doesn't mean they are not in a language.
A language is a system of symbols. Symbols represent things other then themselves. They are abstractions.
The brain uses and manipulates abstraction. It therefore uses language. The internal symbols it uses are specific to the brain, not something that can be read out like a file by another brain. The transfer of esoteric information like that requires a firm of serialisation, an agreed upon language between the participating brains.
That's why the direct brain-to-brain communication that Elon Musk is dreaming about is not possible. (It may be possible to take the output of a retina and plug it into someone else's visual cortex, because bionic eyes do almost exactly that. But it won't work for abstract thought, it won't even work for aural sensory inputs (the data rate from brain to ear is higher than from ear to brain).
I still owe proof that each brain uses different symbols for internal representation, but I think that should be obvious. You can change your mind, you can change how you think about things, you can learn to recognise new concepts, and you can forget old ones. Obviously the internal semantics are changing over time, so if they are not the same within even one brain, how can they be the same in different ones?
Experience exists as a language “in the space between two failures”
I feel like people are already like this today...
Few linguists would agree with the idea of thoughts being embedded in language
In fact I wrote my master thesis about that topic two years ago. Considering newest research from top universities in the field of cognitive linguistic. Check out the term linguistic theory of relativity if you are interested. In overall no one in his right mind can claim or even dares to claim that he knows how human consciousness operates. This includes the relation between language and thought. But this in fact was a very interesting topic to 18th century philosophers. Today the same topic is recreated with empirical experiments but without any groundbreaking news.
@@DimljenaRiba I will , I'm in the process of writing my M.A thesis, M.A of applied linguistics, but universities are closed indefinitely in my country. yes, you are right no one can claim for certain but there are good arguments against the idea of thought only existing through the medium language.
@@DimljenaRiba Actually I know what that theory is. we call it Sapir-Whorf hypothesis here, I read a book that had a whole chapter mentioning observations that discredit this hypothesis, by Danny D. Steinberg and Natalia V. Sciarini Introduction to Psycholinguistics, its a good read, that theory doesnt hold up very well nowadays
Sturmgewehr 44 that’s one of the reasons I didn’t mention it as Sapir-whorf hypothesis. Because it’s immediately discredited by modern linguistics. But if you pay close attention most of modern cognitive linguistics would agree with quite a lot of it. Most problematic is the claim regarding time. Wharf claimed the hopi have no concept of time at all (at least in our western understanding). To be quite frank this I like the “particle physics” of linguistics. I’m also very attuned to psychology. Where (also depending on the scientists) 5 basic emotions are assumed. Every emotion has a specific social task and communicates a certain need. So there you have a sort of communication without language. And emotions are mostly coded in the limbic system of the brain whereas language is part of the neocortex. Than again - don’t forget about the amygdala and the reptilian part of our brains. All of this is communication. But... language itself is also hardwired into our brain and it interacts with all parts of our brain - for example psychotherapy. I could go endless. My main point is that no matter how hard you try you can’t possibly eliminate language in relation to thoughts. And depending on the structure of the language it shapes your thoughts. Just check out (I forgot the name) a Australian Aboriginal tribe. They don’t have an egocentric orientation in space but a geocentric. Meaning, they don’t use concepts like “left” or “right” check it out, you will be amazed! And good luck with your thesis. It will definitely change your worldview, really good choice! ;)
I would like to add english translations, how can I upload them?
The uploader "The Radical Revolution" needs to "open" this options from his side and you will be able to sumbmit the translations
It is maybe not everyone like this but in general in our culture (I am also Slovene) I think there really is a big gap between coumucating to another person and thinking ... and I think it's not neceseraly a bad thing. It's probably really really complex like Zizek is trying to explain. And it's really obvious even he has a problem to make it clear. I dont belive this thing will work. It is probably going to be disaster. To think a bit more general even how much we know for example about brain and a vision: we don't even know how the certain kinds of birds find their exact way from north to south. They find the exact nest. Just think about this! And even this happens: if the nest isn't there anymore they would still come but when they come to that point they don't at first get that the nest isn't there. They try they check, check again... Than you have this hypothesis about how their eyes use quantum entanglement principle so they envision earth's magnetic field. Than u make some more research and try to understand quantum entanglement than you realise that even the best scientists don't agree on it. Global warming is much more certain thing than for example this thing... so... Im really sure: This brain wiring will lead to nowhere. Newralink is big waste of time maybe they will use it as a repression of sorts (maybe some goverments) but who would want that ? Why not just fry the brain like in the old times ?
Thank you for uploading. I had the chance to see a rocket launch in 2018. Unbelievable experience. I shared a pretty cool video of the journey to my channel.
As Derrida has taught us, just interpreting a text can already be extremely subjective and unreliable, and the whole point of a text is to convey a decoded and curated version one's own impressions - both sensory and cognitive- in the first place, so if that's already this hard to do successfully imagine being bombarded by the whole spectrum of somebody's unfiltered or less filtered mental processes, even if only for a moment and at the sender's will.
Communication has already turned for the worse thanks to hyperfast messaging and the expectation to go brainfart-to-keyboard as quickly as possible.
Getting a Neuralink connection running would probably feel like a mix between a waking dream and epileptic seizure.
And ironically, if humanity were to be able to adapt, overcome and learn to codify and decode modes of telepathic communication cleanly it would inadvertently create an intersection that is again separate from pure thought and functioning just like language was in the first place, so what's the fucking point?
I dunno about you guys, maybe I'm just autistic or somehow brain-damaged, but when I want to put a storm of thoughts and impressions into a coherently processable pattern they already show down so significantly that it wouldn't be much extra effort to speak then out loudly.
When the technology snowballs out of control, not even our thoughts will be private. Our minds will be our privacy's last stand and you know corporations will be ready to collect the data the moment it happens.
I think Elon has addressed this himself, it quite literally will be like talking. So there would be no difference. As to ask whats the point? There really is none, communicating through this means is just a perk. The actual substance of neural link is not about this communication to other people, but rather our ability to communicate to technology. Elon's vision is to create something that makes humans and tech essentially one, because he envisions a world where tech will either become us or rule over us.
yes I agree I don't get the point of announcing this technology as sth that is so shocking or useful
I don't get why anyone would want to care about other people's unfiltered mind...
5:09 sounds exactly like that episode of black mirror
Entire History of You?
@@VictoriaSobocki Yeh it's the one where the husband goes through his wife's memory to find out if she was cheating.
All I remember from that episode lol.
FINALLY, the right person to deliver such an important message. And grandiously he delivers!
It's a thing that literally attached to the inside of your pupils when it comes out it's like a reversed tape measurer some pain your perception completely changes it's like an assemblage of fractals that flies away and calls you a piece of shit
It would be good, if possible, to have links to studies etc. Zizek is citing here.
More relevant than ever
Why would the intermediate layers be lost? Would they have to be? If all psychic life, including the 'intermediate layers' like language, are essentially physical, as Neuralink of course presupposes, then nothing would have to be lost.
Neuralink == never having a private thought again.
Elon Musk or the second self aware meme after Donald Trump.
I can imagine Musk being a US president in the next 20-25 years. Americans are experts at making meme figures their presidents.
His ramblings quoted here also sound like an episode of Black Mirror, especially the one with the memory storage implants (S1e3 IIRC), which of course end _very_ badly.
Oh yeah the electric machine revolutionare, current best space exploration company owner, neuralink owner, digging tunnels for revolutionazed travel guy has been memed by some people
@AIFAHRA HORGGHROIs revolutionising finance banking industry, space flight, automobile industry isnt enough for you? Like every other companies CEO he introduces his company products. Can you show me any evidence where he claimed i invented it personally?. Yeah some cultists are stupid but that doesnt mean he is a revolutionar
seems like this guy is really smart..
Dad
Brother
@@erikvandenberg6990 Grandpa
The babysitter
at 6:33 what did he say? what sort of obstacle?
Does anyone know what movie he's talking about?
Agreed, some stones should remain unturned.. THAT is the biggest (IMO) contribution of the religion (though people may not like it) throughout the last 1000 or so years. THAT and the ability to overthrow dictators by "bringing" the masses together when someone does that in an obviously bad manner
Digging deep without having the sense/knowledge of the "recipient" side is a matter of extreme danger
He is describing the Episode of Black Mirror : The Entire History of You (S01E03)
no bro you don't think in words.. words are a precise thing that goes out of a larger thing of mind.. u just can observe it sniff
You're so smart Slavoj. I don't believe computers can do all that shit either.
I am not sure would I agree with speech being a bottleneck for "high-bandwidth" communication through the neuralink interface, or the problem of two human beings thinking in separate language when trying to communicate via that channel. Regarding separate languages, it's the same problem as with speech communication, both persons need to learn the same language. Regarding the speed, there was some research of the "inner speech" - our private language that we use while we are thinking (and unconsciously moving vocal chords while doing it), and it shown that it is heavily optimized, throwing away all the unnecessary stuff, barely resembling the speech that we hear when opening our mouths - so although we speak and thing in the same language, thinking is much faster. My point is, there could be artificially constructed language, serving as a protocol if we wanna get technical, that could be very optimized for the "neuralink communication channel" allowing us to transfer the thoughts pretty quickly and accurately. Step further - that language is not bound to our ability to reproduce it vocally, so it can use sounds that we are not able to produce with our speech organs :) You could think for example just in pure tones, where frequency and other tone characteristics would be the basic phonemes - basically we could talk to each others and to computer interfaces via means of singing, whistling, playing a song :)
The language of the future will be incredible!
At 6:30, he speaks of thoughts not existing prior to words, but that just isn't the case. Animals can not speak, but they do think. Humans did not always have language. That was something they had to develop over time, but they did have thoughts prior to it. We're just very used to using language, because the vast majority of us haven't lived a life without it. But other creatures do and our ancestors did. Just as we learned language over time, we can also unlearn it as it stops being necessary, paving the way for a superior form of communication. Not only communicating words, but also feelings and intent. An alien concept to us now, but a couple centuries from now, our descendants may scoff at our primitive and inefficient use of verbal communication.
I think *How language shapes the way we think | Lera Boroditsky* as one of the more recent videos on youtube covers some of the things you are saying with some examples too, of how different languages developed in different parts of the world are sometimes very different to usual languages and cause the users so think differently. Just how a simple picture of a color pallet can show how people think differently in languages that have a different number of names for colors or maybe no word at all for some, it will be very interesting to see what deeper gaps created in normal translation/communication that this technology will help close in the future.
I'm glad to see transhumanist topics being spoken about. I hope to work for Neuralink, but I also enjoy Zizek, so this is pleasant
I bet we are, and we don't even know it.
Now it would be nice for Neuraling to work for us...to return the favor.
Reminds me 'bout the relationship with this brain of mine (and some of other relationships I had...hehe) :D
Brain regions are similarly mapped across humans and neural activity maps light up in a similar pattern given similar visual and auditory stimuli. Neural networks must learn your unique pattern of hand writing or your particular facial structure but does so from a general training set then finds your unique details. Experience may be generalizable to an extent then translated to your particular neural mapping. Not sure the jury is out on that yet as not being possible.
I would 'like' this a lot more times than once!
It is wrong to say that you cannot actually get to the experience in its raw form without words. "I love you" is not actually the experience and there are many examples and proof that show the limitation of the over reliance on words.
Artificial Intelligence is a misnomer coined as a joke and as a marketeers dream but if you can convince any humans that your computer is more intelligent than them you will have them in your pocket.
It already being actualized
I want to see it.
The best success you have in life are the ones it was difficult to get...
Smells like a Revolution time. When guys?
A revolution without a leader will cause anarchy.
And civil rights leaders get assasinated 24/7.
They don't just want your Service and the Currency that your Service garner$ ; they want to at least know what you're thinking too which will include the greatest data mining of ideas we have seen yet.
Can anyone find a source of what Zizek said about the research with the mouse and the controlling via neurochip?
I think by now we should be certain that consciousness is a separate but still not fully independent entity from the brain (yes its connected in some manner and separated in some sense) ,only present to a sufficient level in humans and to some extent orangutans, it wouldn't make sense to go off a test made on a unconscious animal(basically a biological machine) and believe it would display the same effects on humans (who have a higher level of awareness ), even in animals u can see that when they are affected by a certain parasite(dont remember its name) which basically does the same thing as the scientists did to the rat ,they actively try to resist u see them walking in circles ,because the parasite comands their brain in one direction while the animal tries to go in another direction , if the animal wasnt aware that it wasnt trying to move in the direction the parasite tells it , it wouldn't have tried to go in the opposite way because the animal would've considered it as its own will and moved along. This is present even in ants affected by parasites so it would definitely be present in human beings.
My primary intuition is that such technologies are not possible at least in an effective way, but if we can control quantum particles and use them for our purposes, probably this one too would become possible.
But possibility aside, there're questions about implications. Slavoj discusses those implications.
However, it's quite obvious that organisms adapt to everything, not only body but the psyche adapts itself as well. For a simple example, just think about this: the lifestyle that was unimaginable (not in terms of possibilities, but in terms of living such life) is now common. And the newer generation is fine with it. Of course during the transition times, there are ups and downs.
However, my concern is for people who cannot adapt to such changes. They would feel more and more disconnected with the existence. For them it would only get worse.
Agree. Most people are gonna be ok with this idea. But I tell you as a software developer myself I would not trust anyone or piece of code with my brain the organ I heavely depend on for my life. You shouldn't too. Especilly if u have no control over such technology. Elon musk is fine.... tats his company, his tech. Point is he has control should anything go wrong. As for u nd the rest of the world daaah
I'm not sure I agree with his point on language. He says your thoughts are basically no deeper than the language in which you think them, and that there is no experience of a thought outside of the familiar linguistic scripts you run in your mind. I would argue that you have to mean something in order to have an idea for speech. Even before your mind may think a sentence in English, there's an intention you set out to express before it gets translated into language. From that perspective, language is a sloppy, imprecise vector for experience and intention, and it would be ideal to bypass it if possible by having people communicate without the abstract middle ground where misunderstandings can happen.
I disagree with you. I believe that language being articulate with your language and the way you use it is a form of an art in itself. There are quotes from people who are portrayed as the "Great minds" that appear , at least to me, better than the actual image or concept behind them because they are closer to perfection than the actual abstract concept that is transmitted through them.
@@vasimalsalibi4729 My point isn't that language can't be artistic or well crafted. That's just not the main purpose of language, which is clear communication and understanding; transmitting an intention to facilitate cooperation and organization. Telling your caveman buddy to get firewood when he's on his walk so he doesn't come back with blueberries, thinking you meant for him to get food, when the daylight is already fading and there's no time to get more wood or enough wood to build a fire. Having an interesting perspective come out of linguistic devices, like Eskimos calling a clock "artificial sun," is an happy bonus. Ultimately, language diversity is a disaster unless there are few enough languages globally that everyone can learn them all. There are 6500 right now. You could maybe be fluent in 10 if you really studied throughout your whole young life, but I'd doubt the depth of your understanding of academic levels of any of them in that case.
The necessary obesticle. Could be something similar to chaos in order and order in chaos in jung theory?
6:23 Strong disagree. When we realise we need to brush our teeth, the concept arises in our mind. We can go to the bathroom and go through the whole process without thinking "teeth", "brush", "mirror", and so on.
i think so too 🤷🏻♂️ the concepts need some kind of medium though (picture, sound, smell,...)
I’m in love with him
I have a feeling that he would have his mind blown if he got to see what some of the more advanced AI can do today when combined with some of the most basic marketing strategies used for more than half a century now. I understand that he's very smart, has probably read a huge amount too, but this just sounds like a smart man that hasn't kept pace with modern research and technology.
Eg. listen to the final part 16:28 -> 19:45 and then research a little about how Cambridge Analytica harvested data and how it could be (and was) used to do the things that, he seems to believe, are only possible by using direct brain implants. This in contrast to what he says in the same video a short while earlier 1:37 -> 2:10.
Communication continues to change as technology progresses.
Humans could influence other humans using language, this was dependent on how resistent(receiver)/skilled(talker) was.
The rules moved when drawing was developed and people could share more information faster with more people, but with a middle man, the artist drawing the picture.
Moved again later on after video cameras were developed and people could just go "well, I can describe it to you, you will have to use your imagination for that, I could also draw it and you would have to use your imagination again but a little less, but now i can just show you", this reduced some of the ability of the one recording and sharing again but increased the information quantity
Moved again after people could share optical recordings, reducing even more the recording's creator touch but again (probably) increasing quality and quantity.
People didn't stop talking when drawing was invented, they didn't stop drawing or taking pictures when video was invented, etc., people didn't start only using one language when they learned two and one of them was simply better for a specific task. There were simply more ways for people to communicate, better ways to do specific things (eg. 13:08, he could have said *i love you in writing, or through a phone-call, but the best way was still face to face with words and maybe a kiss), and also more ways for people to control one-another (eg. warnings, posters, product placements in tv/movies, targeted political advertising) but also more ways to move one-another (eg. epics, drama, fiction, dances, recipes, paintings, sculptures, pictures, movies). Developing another language, that could be faster, more specific and easier to use will only replace other means of communication if said other means don't cover their niche use enough to warrant their preservation with continuous use.
I think you missed the fundamental expects of what he was saying. taking your example of saying something or showing him the recording of it. what we do is presuming that showing recording is superior in every expects while it is not. Like I could tell you about how my day went or show you the recording of my day, we can't simply say recording>my explanation as my explanation add stuff you can't see in the recordings
@@siddhan10able
- I'm sorry, I do not understand what Siddhant Gupta
-"fundamental expects of what he was saying" means.
- Siddhant Gupta
-"superior in every **expects** while it is not" oooh, I get it now.
- Siddhant Gupta
-"presuming that showing recording is superior in every expects"
Kmykzy
-"this **reduced some of the ability** of the one recording and sharing again **but increased the information quantity**"
Kmykzy
-"There were simply more ways for people to communicate, **better ways to do specific things**"
Kmykzy
-"Developing another language, that could be **faster, more specific and easier to use** will only replace other means of communication **if said other means don't cover their niche** use enough to warrant their preservation with continuous use."
- Siddhant Gupta
-"my explanation as my explanation add stuff you can't see in the recordings"
I think you just mean adding context. I might be wrong but I think you can do this in video form too.
Imagine your employer tracking your productivity through a neural implant. Terrifying!!
You seem lazy
Explain this man the existence of tissues!
Why the titles do not match the speech? Isn't it the UA-cam plot?
He's right. It's happening right now.
And FDA just approved human trials for brain implants. What timing for this video recommendation haha
Great lecture, however I disagree that we ‘think’ in words. We ‘think and conceptualize’ in ‘images/pictures/colors’. Words or languages is purely an attempt to convey or communicate those images. Seems simple enough.
Be careful with the "We". You don't know how other people "think". Some have a voice in their head narrative their thoughs. Some have colorful pictures. Some have black'n'white pictures. Some have picture perfect pictures and some have blurr "intention" pictures, etc... and so on and so on.
My doctor of a father told me : "we are as different inside as we are different outside". Altough he was refering to the pure biology of the body, this can be applied to the thinking process too
@@Fabzil have you ever had a moment where you wished to express something but could not explain it in words? Then you had to think harder to formulate the correct way to express that thought in words? Is this not proof that we can form complex thoughts without words?
There's a new frightening movie called Possessor strictly on this topic.