The surprising reason consciousness evolved - BBC REEL
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 15 ต.ค. 2024
- Every minute you spend awake, your mind passes from experience to experience. This ebb and flow of thoughts and feelings is often called a ‘stream of consciousness’ - and, throughout history, it was largely believed to only exist in humans. However, thanks to decades of consciousness research, we now know that consciousness is far more widespread in the animal kingdom than we ever imagined.
Which begs the question, why did consciousness evolve in the first place - and when?
A compelling new theory from Eva Jablonka at Tel Aviv University and Simona Ginsburg at the Open University of Israel may just have the answers. Their theory hinges around a process called ‘unlimited associative learning’ and the evolution of this ability may have been a decisive factor in why our earliest ancestors not only survived but thrived.
Script & narration: David Robson
Animation: Archie Crofton
Producer: Florence Craig
Special thanks to Eva Jablonka & Simona Ginsburg
- - - -
Subscribe to BBC Reel: www.youtube.co...
More videos: www.bbc.com/reel
#bbc #bbcreel #bbcnews
![[DRIP] ‘Love, Maybe’ PREVIEW](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/U7hwHp95m1k/mqdefault.jpg)
please remember this is a 5 minute summary of a book which is a summary of a thesis. Very condensed and light on an in-depth topic that couldn't possibly be adequately reviewed in 5 minutes. Having read the book, it's incredibly informative and is meant to be a "starting point" for the reader.
Where can i find it??😱
what book
The learning described can be linked to observation and behaviour, but that doesn't provide any evidence of consciousness - that learning and behaviour could all be done without any associated conscious experience.
Seems more like behaviorist reactions.
I'd contend that conscious experience is essential for open ended learning and dealing with novel situations. If you do not first have the qualia of the red fruit and the feeling of its sweetness, how do you make the association between the two under certain attention/value or reward schema.
Behaviour that is reflexive and that which is not contextualized by other factors (which we do not have a priori knowledge of, as we learn and associate on the go) is not adaptive. Hence the unified rich inner experience. Eg. the weighting for seeking of a sweet reward in the form of a ripe fruit may be influenced by the presence of competitors - this association is not automatic but is drawn from past conscious experience.
Consciousness is the medium for such associative learning and top down control of attention. Many of our actions are pre-conscious and only later are we made aware of them as the brain stitches up our conscious experience and ascribes our will to them after the fact.
@@sharif1306 An association between an image of red fruit, the sugar content of that fruit, and reward doesn't need to be conscious to exist.
There is no reason why a behaviour that is contextualised by many factors requires a conscious experience. Also, there is no reason memory needs to be conscious (eg. Computers can memorise information without consciousness).
If our consciousness only is aware of decisions after the fact, there is even more reason to believe it isn't required for complex learning.
@@martineyles If you had no inner experience i.e. if it were dark inside, how would you know what things relate to what others and how?
How does the reflexive loop between stimuli, memory and action come about? How likely is such a fully formed repertoire of behaviors to emerge - for a wide variety of unforeseen circumstances - to be then selected for? If you were a mere jellyfish or amoeba it would be plausible to navigate your environment by merely tracking nutrient gradients and avoiding stressors and for these behaviors to be hardcoded.
But for complex beings such as ourselves and other mammals occupying a cognitively demanding niche we need an inner 'self' that does the knowing and that can call upon general purpose System 2 reasoning and planning skills that are products of natural selection. So a conscious experience is evolution's shortcut to higher levels of cognitive control and flexibility.
@@sharif1306 on a fundamental level, a neural network based AI is little more than an formula which can adjust its weights and biases in order to better produce a desired result. Despite its simplicity, it is clearly capable of high levels of cognitive flexibility. So how could something as strange and seemingly complex as consciousness arise as a shortcut to a result which can clearly be accomplished through much simpler means?
Kierkegaard put it this way: " The self is a relation that relates itself to it's own self." (Swenson's translation).
Shellfish
Self on a shelf.
doesn’t this entire hypothesis hinge on the idea that consciousness represents little more than its surface level aspects such as thoughts and feelings?
it does
The surprising reason consciousness evolved: it's googly eyes!
"I feel, therefore I am" - Consciousness
this is bullshit. There are electronic replicatiors of sense organs, you still would not call those contious. And if a human loses its sense of smell u would not call it less countious. Ur idiotic distinction of countiousness is of the past and not helpful. I think the only thing you mean is a algorythm that manages other algorythms a neuronal deep reenforcement network that starts to collect and act upon statistics and other stuff of other deep neuronal network specialized for other stuff i would guess. Its like the definition of "spiritual/soul" noone can relly describe what they mean exept with descriptions that are not consistant or have as many "?" as the original term.
I am therefore I feel
@@sherrysyed -Subconsciousness
@@Y0NI nice 1
I think therefore I am would be the proper quote, although I think it works okay this way. A new question arises, though. Where is the separation of thought and sense?
So what is the reason all those things our brain react to exists?
Wow. That was beautiful.
People like putting everything into boxes and drawing straight lines. There is a spectrum of consciousness, and all living creatures are conscious to some extend, as they react to the external stimuli. Even unicellular organisms could learn and exhibit complex behaviours. Also the example with flowering plants was weird. If flowers evolved to be so complex are they conscious? And as far as I know we don't know exactly what caused the Cambrian explosion.
Really interesting tibbits in this vid but no real message, and I agree about the plants and insects thing
You don't need consciousness to react to external stimuli.
They didn't claim that the flowers/plants are conscious but that the insects that recognize and attend to them that are conscious.
As for the Cambrian explosion - it came more than a billion years after the eukaryotes emerged. Likely reason for this delay - there wasn't sufficient oxygen in the atmosphere to support complex animals with active lifestyles. A few hundred millions after the first photosynthesis and chloroplasts there was enough oxygen in the atmosphere to support them.
Why do we call them “fingers” If we never see them “fing”?
😐
Perhaps I was unconscious at the time, but I didn't find out what consciousness actually is.
The animation is so cool, its definitely worth to be on TED ED
this literaly explains nothing about consciousness or why it exists.
you could imagine something that does all of these things without having a subjective experience.
Not enough to imagine. You need to build it to prove it. 😅
@@sharif1306 even if you built one, that would prove nothing as you cannot prove that anything is or isn't conscious, so that's a moot point.
@@alkeryn1700 so your earlier argument is invalidated as you cannot categorically say that such a rich repertoire of behaviors could appear in an organism without consciousness first having emerged. If you believe we are automatons designed by a creator that could be plausible but we are products of evolution.
Also I could very well build an artefact with an inner VR experience consisting of audio video multi modal representations. This would be it's sort of subjective experience we would have access to. Indeed this is a key area of focus in generative AI research.
@@sharif1306 oh yes i could categorically say that, also i never mentioned a creator or whatnot...
Also just because of evolution the notion that you perceive truth is just wrong because with natural selection organism that see truth will always disappear and get replaced by organism that are more fit.
Because of evolution theory, an organism will never evolve to see a truthful representation of its reality.
@@alkeryn1700 still think there's no utility to the inner experience? Spend a day with your eyes closed. Just cause you say so doesn't make it true or remotely plausible.
Never said evolution always shows truth as evidenced by various optical illusions but only that which increases fitness. But to think it has no correlation or grounding in reality would be stupid.
I don't get it. Unlimited associative learning does not, ipso facto, imply consciousness. Why can't all this happen without conscious thought, such as in controlling blood pressure or the digestive process? I hope the researchers behind this theory have tenure because this work won't get them there.
I like how all creatures in this clip appear to have been so aware to take m3th or sth.
It evolved for processing meta-information - abstracting meaning from and interpretation of primary sensory information, and integrating spatial information from temporal. It's an entropy-reduction process, involving a physical correlation between thermodynamic and informational entropies, which is why it experiences rhythm induction in the temporal domain and octave equivalence in the spatial domain. Consciousness evolved for improved - and especially, generalised - problem-solving; basically as a general-purpose computer, using efficiency itself to model problems and find solutions.. it's a flow of wave-like activity cascading from the cerebellum up the temporal lobes to neocortex, and circulating through the corticothalmic feed-forward / feedback loops, the carrier waves the power spectra seen on electroencephalograms.
Merely tracking nutrients and avoiding stressors etc. can be achieved without a CNS, so would be a poor explanation for consciousness's early development, though obviously providing selection pressure once actually present. Jellyfish with rudimentary photoreceptors seem to 'navigate' by visual cues, if you could call it that, but lacking a CNS obviously aren't conscious, yet highly conserved over aeons, apparently under little pressure to develop brains. But then their niche is a lower trophic level.. the increasing complexity of nervous systems up the food-chain obviously driven by the arms race between predator and prey.
and/or its used to deduce from 2 unrelated infos to a 3rd and so on. Seems just like a network that works with the infos of other networks instead of only external stimuly. Maybe even to plan where/how the algorythm wants to develop based on the new environment and past exp. Who knows maybe the term is not even coherant.
rhythm induction in the temporal domain and octave equivalence in the spatial domain. References?
@@sharif1306 Just resolve the octave equivalence paradox; factors of two are the simplest-possible frequency relationships in either domain; since in the spatial domain a factor of one is just a unison (ie. a harmonic interval of 'zero'), and in the temporal domain just a pulse or beat, 'rhythm', as harmony, involves a relationship between two or more freqs. By default, then, all information we process is spatiotemporal modulation of factor of two symmetries; since ie. harmonic consonance is maximal at this minimal freq ratio, what we're actually referring to _by_ the term 'harmonic consonance' reduces to this ineffable perception of 'equivalence' or parity arising at all factors of two of any arbitrary reference freq; as we increment the integer factors we climb up the harmonic series, so all factors of three are perfect fifths, factors of four octaves again, factors of five produce thirds, of six, fourths and so on through the series, 'dissonance' thus reducing to degrees of 'inequivalence', or 'difference' in the Shannon sense. Octave equivalence is thus reading 'zero difference' in terms of meta-information - the 'paradox' being that it is dependent upon this very specific, empirical difference.
What is increasing with integer factors is the size of the smallest temporal integration windows freq relationships resolve to, thus representing a convergent axis between informational and thermodynamic entropies. So even when not listening to music, all freq relationships in the ambient audio field are still being processed the same way - inevitably resolving freq components from multiple sources that just happen to align to whatever integer factors. Information that resolves within a given temporal integration window is 'spatial domain', and information spanning multiple TIW's is 'temporal'; all animals thus divine space from time on the fly as a function of their respective critical flicker freqs, mass / radiative surface area, refractory periods of sensory and processing nuclei and metabolic rates etc. - across the board, brains substantiate, enumerate, resolve and reproduce meta-information (information _about_ information) in terms of entropic signatures directly relating to the energy cost of processing.
Octave bandwidths - in space _and time_ - are thus the 'groove' that consciousness rides in, the 'needle on the record' the instantaneous solutions being resolved in the executive temporal integration window, or conscious 'now'.
@@MrVibrating One day I may fully grasp your answer but it is not today. Are these your original thoughts?
The information theoretic entropy reduction with regard to beliefs about the external milieu is a crucial aspect of Karl Friston's Free Energy Principle. Maybe your resolution of the octave equivalence paradox is some empirical evidence towards it.
@@sharif1306 I'm unfamiliar with Friston's work; my own theoretical solutions to over-unity exploit the fine-print in the time-conservation of momentum to produce divergent inertial frames wherein net system velocity can be doubled by merely doubling the input work done, whilst net KE in the ground frame _squares.._
But FWIW and quite incidently, i just expanded somewhat on the above topic in response to an old 'Zombie Dave' interview here: /watch?v=xy2vzhwdkpM
The entire universe is concious. One day science will catch up and realize that counciousness is fundamental. You can't seperate the observed from the observer.
I don't understand why they put googly eyes on the animals in this video. It was strange.
To protect the innocent...LOL
it's a secret message for other masons
I have never understood why people believe that other animals are not conscious.
Just try to do something in an unconscious state.
*When it was enlightened*
La atención no depende de un cambio de estado de ánimo o estado psicológico. Es totalmente independiente de toda condición orgánica, aunque sus actividades y observaciones pasan por lo orgánico. Aunque la atención existe independientemente de lo Orgánico, y nunca cambia en sí, el objeto de la atención puede cambiar según leyes matemáticas y fuerzas de influencia de varias clases.
Amazing how smart we are.
It evolved so it could disappear, look at people today and tell me they are thinking, aware people. We falling apart. Intelligence isn’t a winning trait anymore, if anything it’s a pitfall. Idiocracy is a documentary, not a comedy
Consciousness and mind are two different things. The title is misleading as this theory explains the emergence of mind, not consciousness.
"Art for art's sake" and a "mind" that is interested in conciousness and interpretation of dreams set us aside from animals. Other factors like math and so on can be argued for the advent of what we call conciousness aswell, conciousness and living due to experience and planning isn't the same thing....if so then ai are already concious I would claim.
❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤ I love it .
How could they use "unlimited" in association with consciousness that is limited by the senses possessed by a form of sentient life? Humans may never attain a level of consciousness where associative learning is acquired via a magnetoreceptive sense, for example. Honing pigeons learn how to survive via data our senses do not allow an awareness of.
A better naming: taxis associative learning.
Cool vid. Consciousness is required for suffering. Therefore I don’t like it.
The eyes are driving me nuts
What was the reason for the white eyes on all creatures?
Failed attempt at humor...
a higher form of consciousness.
so its less boring/more engaging so you squeeze out some neuromodulatos and encode this info better, the decition was made by inuition of the person making this segment ask his dna
Consciousness evolved through believing one's thoughts or ideas are unique, profound and original.....only to discover they werent.
It’s all in the mind
I believe all mammals are conscious and most birds .
Amei
Your Consciousness - by television company
it's the telly!
free west papua you
I was just wondering where the 300 million years ago situations became dated and/or written down? 4+28+2024
First show that it evolved, then worry about why. Put the horse in front of the cart, not the other way round. 🙄
You are an eloquent spokesman for Scientism
indeed
Scientism as opposed to ignorantism? 🤔
I submit, it didn't (conscious reason) evolve. The ability came about to quick to equate Evolutions time continuum. The ability(of at least, consciousness) seems to me a mechanism placed fully operational at 175.000 Years past. Placed. Quickly. I must add.
I thought that this might be about getting,per say, raped during a hurricane when you passed out from the drowning.
so this isn't evidence.... more this is a reinforcement of kant.
And he said what?
OK, but why all the googly eyes?
Why did they evolve, and why hadn't I noticed them sooner?
What was the reason for the weird eyes pasted on every creature? What did that have to do with consciousness?
An attempt at humor,
a higher form of consciousness.
to squeze out more chemicals to make you remember/engage with this information. Its like when a teacher uses a voice that is not monotone or shows you a cool experiment. It helps you to consolidate information since your brain might be persuaded to allow some more cells to adapt since it thinks this information might fit in your "plan"
please re-unlock human consciousness.
Not possible it is like saying stone became alive
Consciousness is fundamental ground out of which matter appears to us and even our very experiences with that matter and world, so consciousness is light in which world appears and experienced.
consciousness is stoned
Stone did become alive 😅. Life emerged from the interaction of olivine and such minerals in hydrothermal vents with acidic ocean water.
@@sharif1306 jokes apart, with what experience or feeling your saying it emerged out of stone? For you to feel experience and say it you must have consciousness
Hence, by our own experience it's consciousness the ground on basis of which we're understanding and experiencing the world
So in literal sense, No you can't prove consciousness to be later emergence compared to stones lol
@@Anshulhe that's a logical fallacy. Consciousness allows you to make sense of the world doesn't mean it precedes all existence. When you die or go to sleep the world doesn't cease to exist. There is an objective reality independent of your subjective experience.
As for understanding origin of life look into the work of Nick Lane.
@@sharif1306 Yes I'm not saying it's wrong, all I'm saying is you can't prove it, because objective reality is also subjective
Once you die no way of proving whether world is or not
As life we're limited by consciousness, in consciousness and we can't go out and verify without it
“May have evolved.”
This begs the question: why aren't you vegan?
CAN'T STAND THE LISPING!
People with lisps are unlikely to change their physiology to suit you. Your intolerance is a personal problem that you are just going to have to manage yourself.
@@daniellamcgee4251 - It's NOT a physiological problem; it's an acquired habit in UK speech practiced by some, and is voluntary for the most part.
It's akin to the baffling preference of substituting "W"s for "L"s, which some Brits also do. To other English-speaking ears, it comes off sounding like baby talk.
@@daveogarf i have a lisp and i'm definitely not 'practicing' anything.
@@daveogarf Language is a combination of physiology and environment. We hear and learn. A young adult in my family has a lisp, says 'l's at the end of words as 'w's (reverse of what you have heard) and 'r's as 'w's . He has dypraxia; co-ordination disorder which is obviously physiological. He would not be the only one. Also, people with poor hearing may develop anomalies in speech.
If it's common, not just individuals, it's probably a dialect, and is learned from hearing language. A relatively small percentage of people cultivate an accent and keep it as their permanent speaking voice.
Whatever way, they aren't going to change their speech for you. It might help to figure out exactly what annoys you so much.
sound engineer using a multiband limiter. a lot of people don't notice it and think the sound all great because the compression is so amazing.
How can something know it’s own creation? Smells of hubris.
Conciousness doesn't evolve
Doesn't it? I think you are imposing unrealistic limits.
@@lagreen2122 Consciousness is like light, mind evolves. And the spectrum of perception widens.
And that is because your neuronal network (the squishy stuff in your skull that is very dense and extremly complex and super small so you can only see some strange stuff) changes. Dont act like u understand biologiy noone has solved it perfectly without any questions. There are many things to be solved, we can just say its extremly resonable to say that it is very complex since its so super small and what it can do suggests that it is a system with many unsolved myserys, that does not mean you can narrow it in and we know a lot lot lot
Your light whatever is just blabla you dont know anything you are just using your intuition. But that does not mean you cant keep going who knows maybe its helpful. And noone benefits if you feel bad, friend.
@@hanskraut2018 🙄😑 chill man, I was just trying to explain it from a philosophical standpoint. I don't think science will ever be able to solve the 'hard problem of consciousness'. And there's significant reason to why some people think this. Some things are weird, like observer effect.
Bdw tell me what do you think conciousness is? I would really like to know thought on this.
If our perception of time is stitched together from disparate parts (color, movement and form perception and later on the brain fills in the form with color and movement) then perhaps consciousness is also stitched together in a similar way. This of course would make consciousness somewhat of an illusion since a car is not technically a car if each individual parts (the wheels, the windows, the motor etc) are viewed separately and also altogether as one at the same time.
hummm.......Gods plan..
Intelligence in reporting / news is (very very slowly) improving good. I assumed this when i was ~ 12 now please start to take mental health seriously and reevaluate determinism. Also focus more on biological limits and try to break those. And start thinking about genetic disadvantagues for a individual for the benefit or a group or groups. Try to think "if this is like this" why is X not like Y and forum hypothesis that way. For example why is attractiveness not always maximized on every human? Sure we can have explanations but is it not interessting that biology can change your apprearance try to find surcumstances where this happens in a rapid way, for example at drug exposure, illness, sport or other stuff that changes the biology or environment. Majbe a blullyed rat too and the effect on behaviour and that new behavious effect on femals preceived attractiveness.
Bicameral Mind. Google it! It’s the only theory of consciousness that has really clicked with me.