This is Going to Hurt. Everything You Know is False. | Annaka Harris on Impact Theory

When people first encounter these the the science that we have and also just the idea of messing with these intuitions, it can be uncomfortable and some people don't like going down this path. So, I just like like like to make a little disclaimer or or to say that I think people can feel very out of control and I mean there's there's something jarring about learning that everything the things that feel most true to you about reality are possibly not that not structured that way. Wait wait till you explain delayed measurement and people really lose their [ __ ] Like that's where it's going to get interesting. We're we're not even in the crazy stuff yet. Hey everyone, welcome to Impact Theory. Today's guest is a New York Times best-selling author who is challenging some of our most fundamental notions of what it means to be a conscious being. She is an editor and consultant for many esteemed science writers and she specializes in making the notoriously difficult to comprehend topics of neuroscience and physics accessible to the masses. Her writing has not only appeared on bookshelves far and wide, but it is also been featured by some of the most prestigious outlets in the world including the New York Times. From best-selling author Adam Grant to theoretical physicist Sean Carroll, some of the brightest minds on the planet have publicly championed her work, her ideas, and her uncanny ability to explain hard things well. So well, in fact, that in addition to her groundbreaking work for adults, she's written a very well-received children's book called I Wonder and collaborated with Susan Kaiser Greenland on mindful games activity cards. She also teaches mindfulness to students in the Inner Kids organization and has taught her techniques to children as young as 4 and 1/2 years old. Talk about making things accessible. So, please help me in welcoming the author of Conscious, A Brief Guide to the Fundamental Mystery of the Mind, Annika Harris. What is up? Welcome. Good to see you as well. Thank you so much for coming on the show. Yeah, thanks for having me. Absolutely. I am as awe-inspired by the topics that you cover as you are. What is would you say your most sort of awe-inspiring insight into the human mind? Mhm. Um, you know, I think I think the just the simple insight that consciousness is as mysterious as it turns out to be. Um, it is to me the most awe-inspiring piece and it's really the reason I wrote the book. I mean, there are many reasons, but but the main reason was really um to share this sense of inspiration and awe at um just how mysterious consciousness is. Um, and many people actually don't realize that it's one of the great enduring mysteries. So, we're all kind of familiar with looking out into the cosmos and wondering about black holes and the beginning of the universe. Um, and is there life, you know, on other planets and and these things are naturally awe-inspiring. Um, and many people don't realize actually that that consciousness is on in some ways on equal footing with these these other great mysteries. Um, but the difference is it's here with us in every moment. Um, and so that there's actually this um this great mystery, this great awe-inspiring mystery that's with us um it in every moment kind of to to be to be um reveled at and to Why do you think so many people miss it? Mhm. I think part of the reason is that neuroscience has made so much progress um that I think most people think some scientist understands it or if they don't quite understand it, they'll understand it soon. Um and I think part of it is just that it's it's kind of something we take for granted, I think. We have always assumed um I think you know in modern times since we've had modern science we've always assumed that um consciousness is analogous to something like a light bulb where um it seems miraculous to flip a switch and and suddenly a room is flooded with light. Um but but once you understand the details, once you understand electricity um and the mechanics of a light bulb um it's something you can understand. It's not it's not really mysterious. Um and I think people a lot of people have assumed that consciousness is analogous to that um and there I think there are many reasons why that that analogy actually doesn't hold. Um So if the analogy of it being like a light bulb doesn't hold, like where do you go from there? And you've always been very careful to define consciousness and while I hate to ask you to repeat yourself, we probably Yeah. Yeah, yeah, no, I'm glad you brought that up. So the way I'm using the word consciousness that people use the word in a in a variety of ways and um often it it makes it a confusing term. Um and actually the the best term I think is is experience to really point to the most fundamental sense of consciousness that I'm talking about and that my book is about and that I think it is mysterious. Um so consciousness simply being experience whether um there is something that it's like to be um a collection of atoms in the universe. So we we often forget that that um it's literally true that we are stardust. We are made of the same ingredients of of everything else in the universe um and there's this magical fact that when matter gets configured in in a certain way um it lights up from the inside that suddenly there's something that it's like to be that matter. And so, many people use the word consciousness to kind of talk about higher-order um reasoning, um self-awareness, things like that. Um but, I'm using it in the most in the most fundamental sense, simply having an experience. Simply, um there's something it's like to use Thomas Nagel's um definition. He He wrote a famous essay called What Is It Like to Be a Bat? Um and in that essay, he he says, um an organism is conscious if there's something that it's like to be that organism. And some people have a hard time with that terminology, but for me that really kind of gets gets to the core of of this simple definition of consciousness and why why it's mysterious. One thing you're you've been very careful um to talk about as well, and this is where I first went. So, I I dive into the book, I'm super interested. I'm Yeah, I'm with you. Like, let's talk about it. Yeah. And as you started explaining it, I found myself conflating the notion of being conscious with high-level cognition. Right. And I So, I was like, "Whoa, like how As you got into the some of the more like esoteric panpsychism that maybe um this is all a field like gravity that consciousness just sort of is, it exists, and from that thing spring forward." Which is [ __ ] fascinating, and we will for sure talk about that, but Well, I would emphasize maybe, too. Yeah, great point. I'm completely open to it, but I Yeah, I I I like to be clear that we really don't know, and I I I'm not advocating that view. I just think it's actually it's worth If it's worth exploring, and we should be open to it, but No question. And one thing I hope that we get to at some point is the very fact that that it shouldn't be off-limits to talk about these crazy ideas, and the fact that this is like career suicide for so many people. It's just so weird to me. But, before we derail on that, so teasing out the two concepts, I think is super important, cuz people will not be able to get into the joys of this mystery if they think what they're being asked to contemplate is that Iraq has um high-level cognition because then they they can't separate because my my biggest argument is always when someone starts talking in a way that makes it sound like you're saying there's essentially a soul or whatever. I'm like Phineas Gage, homie. Like and I'm assuming you know well the story of Phineas Gage. I actually don't know that. So, Phineas Gage, this is um this is so interesting. This is one of my favorite. You talk about so many examples in the book. It it'll immediately be familiar. It's just another one of those. But um Phineas Gage was a railroad worker who hit a tamping rod and shot up and he lost like some crazy amount like a teacups teacups worth of brain matter but never loses consciousness but forever is different and they say he went from like the most likable guy ever to like a total [ __ ] He could not hold a job and it's just like Yeah. Is it the same guy? Like the only thing that happened was it damaged to the brain. Yeah, it's fascinating that um we have this intuition somehow that this isn't the case but of course we know that our experience um our conscious experience in this moment and all of the content that's flooding in through this experience is a result of brain processing and if you change the brain, the experience changes, the thoughts change, the feelings change. It's it's um it's all correlated. I feel like you you had um a question that you were getting at um when you brought that example up that I wanted to answer. I felt like it was a good question. So, what I want to when whenever somebody starts talking about um hey, there there is there is something inside of me that isn't my body and there's great comfort in that for them. And as somebody who who literally my mission in life is to get people to get control of their conscious thoughts, maybe even reprogram some of the default mode network. We should talk about that as well. But like so, my mission in life, if I'm really going to put it in like sort of deep biological terms, is to get people to rewire their default mode network, so their very sense of self is more productive. Right. So, that their identity, their beliefs, their value systems at a neurological level, so that they're getting like this neurochemical response that drives them towards something effective, right? So, you can get a neurological response that drives you towards destructive behavior, or you can retrain things and and be going in a positive direction. Okay, so Yeah. And I realized Yeah, sorry. I just realized now that the the distinction you wanted to make was between consciousness in this very fundamental sense that I'm using it in the book and complex thought. Correct. Um and that we have to be very careful to um not conflate them, that that we must distinguish between the two um for many reasons. Even in a in a human sense, we know that babies, at some point, the people can argue about where it comes in, but at some point a baby um that does not have language and who is not having the types of thoughts you and I are having or thinking through anything complicated at all, um is having a conscious experience. And then, of course, you can go through the animal kingdom and people tend to agree and disagree that the more simple the creature gets, but at a pretty simple level even, you know, a mouse, um something like that, um most of us and most neuroscientists would say, yes, a mouse is having some kind of experience. It is It's not an unconscious zombie or robot, you know, we we know that their brains are similar enough to ours that they're having so- some type of experience. Um and then in in some of this work, we can start to postulate how far down an experience actually goes. Um and so, when we do that, it's very important to distinguish consciousness just the fact of experience from complex thought or mind or or anything like that, that it's it's certainly possible to imagine and feasible to to postulate a scientific understanding of experience in a very, very minimal form. Yes, that notion of experience. How much of that do you feel requires uh a recognized experience? So, by recognized experience I mean so you you've said very clearly that um hey look, this whole notion of panpsychism where uh essentially consciousness may be a field like gravity and that things spring up through it. If that is um real, then there are uh maybe this is like sort of little minds coming together and and I'll let you explain that far better than I can. And that we we can get these um collaborations between these which will change the nature of the consciousness. But what I want to tease out is like, okay, if there isn't a light switch moment where something either is or isn't conscious there definitely seems to be the quality of that experience changes dra- matically. And so when I think about if So, I'll I'll stay in in terms maybe I understand a little bit better. So, if I think of I I I just want to ask a question to see if you're getting at something that that comes up a lot which I think is an interesting question, which is more kind of the meta level, like the awareness of being aware in a sense part of what consciousness is. Is that your question? Okay. Um so, I would say no. Um I think that there's a pure and more basic form of consciousness that does not necessarily entail an awareness of consciousness itself. And I think even within, you know, life as we know it in the animal kingdom, um I think it's very likely that there are creatures um certain insects, things like that, where where the brain um processing is just not complex enough for that type of thinking to take place. Um but that doesn't mean there's no experience present. And I think some scientists would would argue with this, but there there definitely enough of them that would agree with me that there is um the fact of experience needn't entail anything more than just whether there's there's something it's like. So, I I often will use the example of a worm. We don't know if worms are conscious or not. This is um not something neuroscientists have a have a consensus on, but you can imagine it's not that hard for us to imagine that, you know, worms lumbering across the ground has this very very minimal experience. And it either is or it isn't, right? So, there is something about consciousness where you can say um it's it is binary in a sense, even though there's this spectrum once you get on the spectrum um where there the content can grow and get more and more complex um but as soon as you get to the end of that spectrum at its most simple form and then drop off of it, you're you're talking about no experience at all. So, when we talk about rocks, um whether or not we're right, we most most of us assume there's nothing that it's like to be a rock. There's no experience present there at all. But we could imagine that a worm um has some felt experience of the its skin against the ground, of cold and warm, of you know, temperature changing, pressure changing, something incredibly minimal. Um and so, it's not at all easy to rule out in a case like that. Um and in that case, you wouldn't have this kind of mess awareness. Mhm. So, now getting into that, there's one question that I want to explore, which I'm not even sure how to think of this. So, um at some point, where does it go from just it's fascinating to think about to this really matters? Mhm. And is that is there a line in there where you're drawn to this because you really think that it matters like with AI and things like that? Or is it just pure fascination? It's definitely both. So, I would just start with a the the simple fact and this is really um my my reasons behind wanting to to write a book about this are kind of split down the middle between these two things as well. So, first it's it's a little bit like what I I was talking about before, just um the fact that being aware, having more understanding of not just how mysterious consciousness is, but the specific ways that it's mysterious. Um I actually think can bring a lot of of joy um to our lives just in in the form of awe um and inspiration of that kind. Um but I know I I am a scientist at heart, even though I'm not a trained scientist, and I really believe we can get a better understanding of consciousness. I think it's possible we'll never really be able where it's you know, human brain is not designed to understand the the fundamental nature of reality and we may not be able to get there, but um I'm optimistic that we can. And I think um in order for this work to get done, one, we have to be willing to have the conversation. That touches a little bit on on what you wanted to talk about um with it being kind of a taboo subject once you start postulating some some more far out ideas. So, this this actually brings me to um the focus of my book, which is at its core challenging our intuitions. And challenging intuitions is a very important part of the scientific process. Um so so the short answer to your question is um I think it's wonderful for human beings to contemplate in the same way that it's good for us to contemplate all of the mysteries. I I also think that mysteries are are really uniting. When all of humanity is facing something that they don't understand, I actually think there's something really beautiful about that and it really connects us in in a way. Um and on the other side, I actually think we have a lot to learn and I even think in some ways we've learned a lot through modern neuroscience that is so counterintuitive that we have not yet absorbed the implications of what we've already learned. And again, this is about challenging intuitions and how important this is in the scientific process. Um so this is true in anytime we gain new knowledge that's that's groundbreaking. Um there always seems to be this period of time where we're wrestling with our intuitions. Um and everything from when we finally understood that the earth is a sphere and not flat um to understanding the germ theory of disease to understanding that space and time are warped by gravity. These are all things that when we discover them, when we encounter them, they're so counterintuitive. There's always this period of time when scientists are kind of wrestling with their intuitions before they can make progress. Um because it when things are so counter to our intuitions, we have a hard time accepting them. And so you kind of have to be face the same evidence over and over again and then kind of reshape your intuitions in order to think about the world in this new way so that the science can progress. Um and so I think we're at a place like that with consciousness right now. So I think it's it's really important for us to be challenging our intuitions about consciousness. And that's really what what my book does, and it begins um with two questions that I think we have very strong intuitive answers um for that then I spend the rest of the book kind of picking apart to see to see where it takes us. What are those two intuitions? Um so they're related, but they're they're slightly different questions. The first one is is there evidence um of consciousness in any system on the outside in the form of behavior or or something else? So um in a human brain, in in a human, in a cat, in a dog, is there something we can point to from the outside such as behavior that will tell us conclusively that consciousness is present in that system? And most of us, myself included, have a very strong intuitive response to that, which is yes, I'm you know, I'm not sure what they what all of them are, what that list is, but I can come up with an easy example. Um, if I'm leaving for work in the morning and my daughter doesn't want me to go and she's crying and saying, "Mommy, don't go." I think that behavior to me is is absolutely evidence that she's having an internal experience, that she's conscious of her emotions and what she's going through and grief and you know, all of that in that moment. Um, and so we all have this and and I think this gets to the core of of our intuitions about consciousness and what we think it is and where we actually could be wrong. And I think um, while that's likely um, a good way to test it if consciousness is present, I actually think there's a deeper sense in which that is actually not evidence at all. And we can we can kind of pick that apart through looking at different areas of neuroscience. And the second question is similar. Which is is consciousness doing anything? Um, is it serving a function? Is it driving our behavior? And again, all of us think, yes, of course, absolutely. I couldn't There's so many things I couldn't do just, you know, in my daily life today. Think thinking through certain choices. Um, when we have a fear response to something, you know, running away from a dangerous situation. I my car catches on fire and I run in the other direction. Um, we feel that consciousness is is truly motivating so much of our behavior. And that that's the one that I think um, is we now have have modern neuroscience telling us that intuition is at least off, if not completely wrong. Um, and so You need to go into that one cuz some of the examples you give in the book are crazy town. Right. Um, I should say also that when people first encounter these the the science that we have and also just the idea of messing with these intuitions, it can be uncomfortable and um some people don't like going down this path. So, I just like like like to make a little disclaimer or or to say that I think people can feel very out of control. And I mean, there's there's something jarring about learning that everything the things that feel most true to you about reality are possibly not that not structured that way. wait till you explain delayed measurement and people really lose their [ __ ] Like that's where it's going to get interesting. We're not we're not even in the crazy stuff yet. Well, I guess that's why I'm saying this now before we get there. them into deep waters. But I yeah, but what I've what I've learned is that most people, if they're not excited about it to begin with, spending a little time thinking about it that there there's a way to kind of come around to the other side where this actually um is very freeing. That looking that that um that upending some of these intuitions is actually um for lack of a better word, kind of similar to a a spiritual experience. There's a positive way to to view all of this, I should say. 1,000%. Okay, so this this part is really interesting for me. So, what is some of the science that we can look at that says, "Hey, our intuitions about how we think we are in control probably don't make sense." Yeah. And because what I I want to put you and your idea in context because people watching this probably don't realize you wrote a book of heresy. Like if you were an academic, you'd be lighting your career on fire. And the fact that you're talking about this, you've privately had people who just can absolutely not come out and talk about what you're talking about um publicly saying, "Thank God somebody is talking about this because like you said, and this is this is why I find your work so interesting is we have to explore this. So, whether or not it's right is kind of irrelevant. We have to get outside of the box of our intuition, which the while I don't want to start here, the ultimate example of that to me is the delayed measurement experience in physics, which freaks me I cannot tell you how many hours I've spent thinking about the double slit experiment. Like It's insane. And it that is a deeply spiritual moment for me where I go, "Whoa, I do not make faces the chills right now. I don't understand something. So profoundly fundamental that everything that I'm looking at in the world is not what I think it is. A thousand percent. So I should say also just for for your listeners and viewers that there are now some wonderful animations online that explain the double slit experiment if they if they don't know what that is and they want to spend the rest of their lives wondering about it. Um that it's it's a hard one to explain, it's a hard one to grasp, and now that we have YouTube videos it actually makes it a lot easier. All right, before we get there there there are some sort of double slit type things with the mind where binding comes into play and the conscious mind taking um ownership of something that it actually didn't even know about until the very end. Walk people through some of that Binding is actually a great place to start. Um just in understanding how the content of our conscious experience um is really created by the brain in ways that that are behind our intuitions or we wouldn't necessarily know it. And binding is a phenomenon um talked about in in neuroscience. And David Eagleman is actually wonderful on this subject and he he's written and and given talks on the subject. They're fascinating. Um but simply binding is really um our brain's attempt um and successful attempt at taking things that are happening in the real world um at different times and syncing them so that our present moment experience um is of things in the world happening at the same time where those signals to us are actually coming in at a different time. So, the example in my book I give is of playing tennis. So, if you're playing tennis and you hit the ball with the racket, it seems like this is all happening in one moment, but the truth is the sound waves from the sound of the ball hitting the racket are traveling at a different speed than the light waves of the light bouncing off the ball and hitting our retina and then being processed by the brain. And same with the sensory experience in your hand of feeling the ball hit the racket. That's a much slower process than we're talking about. Your your nervous system actually receiving signal through your arm and and our experience is that that all happens at the same time. But the truth is the sight came more quickly than the sound and the sound came more quickly than than the physical sensation. And so, there's a process that that we call binding whereby all of these signals kind of get woven together in a in a present moment experience that that gets delivered to to your conscious experience. There unconscious processes that that then cause you to have to have this experience. There are brain disorders that can interrupt these processes, too. There's something called agnosia. There are many different types of agnosia. But the it's it's a kind of a failure of the brain to to do this type of binding for us. There's finger agnosia where you cannot tell the difference between two of your fingers. Sights and sounds can get confused or not arrive at the same time. There are Have you read much about prosopagnosia? Um So, it's like it's where the person can I see your eyes. Oh god, your eyes are so familiar. Your nose. But it's not coming together as a face for them. Yes. I often tease my wife that she has prosopagnosia cuz she can never recognize famous people, but like like to me Is that specifically for recognizing faces? face. Yeah, so prosop was a Greek word for face. Right. Okay. Yes. and I just that was one of the first times where I began to realize, "Okay, woah, woah, woah. The brain has a lot of different regions." Like people I don't know what this disease is called, but certain brain trauma will lead leave somebody where they can't detect motion. So, they see completely normally, but everything is a snapshot. So, if they're pouring something, it just looks like frozen liquid, and then all of a sudden the cup is overflowing, and there's like the the essentially refresh rate on their eyes is so slow that everything is just these like static still images. Right. No, we're we're taking a ton of unconscious brain processes for granted that we don't realize all of these things are are being woven together for us. There there's something called disjunctive agnosia. It's similar to what you're talking about with the face, but these are you know objects in space. You can recognize all of the different parts. You can recognize the color, the shape, but you can't see it as an object. You can't recognize something as a cup. Um there even you know minor um things that can happen where um you can recognize something as a tool for eating with, but you don't know whether it's a spoon or a fork. Um anyway, so yeah, so the so the we could go on and on forever with Let's go on a little longer because there's there there are more that you talk about in the book that I think are super important. Cuz where I want to get people like my my whole like thesis in life is to get people to understand your brain is creating a virtual world for you. You have mistaken this virtual world for the real world. And once you understand we're talking about Umwelt's here, homie. We're talking about you take the world in in a certain way, which is why the article by Nagel on what it's like to be a bat is so fascinating. It's asking you to step outside your own Umwelt into something else's and say, "How fundamentally different would this whole experience be?" But what I really want people to understand cuz this this was a huge breakthrough for me when I went from having a totally fixed mindset and I just thought life is hopeless and I can't go where I want to go cuz I'm only so intelligent and I'm just not that bright. And so, I'm stuck here and I spent a lot of time there. And then, began to realize, "Wait a second." I started reading about the brain. I was like, "Whoa! Like, the brain is cobbling [ __ ] together. It's keeping me from bumping into too much stuff and for that I am grateful. But, ultimately, like, there's a lot of lies being told to me by this evolutionary machine. And once I could begin to think through them and go, "Oh, whoa! Like, it's it's interpreting this. It's interpreting that. What is it interpreting that's creating an emotion for me that isn't helpful?" I think people also experience a lot of relief from this idea that they are responsible for all of that processing, too. And so, this gets into When when I when I talk about these examples in my book, I'm I'm specifically talking about um two illusions that I think inform our view of consciousness, which is why I spend a lot of time on them. Um and one is this illusion of conscious will. Um and one is the illusion of being a self. And I think that that's one place that that relates to a lot of the work that you do. Um because this false sense of a self is actually where a lot of human suffering comes from. And part of it is is what I was just getting at, which is that we have this idea that, you know, even though we understand that we're brain processing, you know, at bottom, somehow we have we have a very strong intuition that there is a me that is separate from the brain processing. And um there can be a lot of um guilt and regret and and things like this that come about because of kind of a false way of viewing um what, in fact, we are and what our conscious experience is. So, the the notion of this this self that somehow can override whatever the brain is doing or um you know, make make decisions somehow. I mean, it's funny. It's an incoherent idea, but we all have it very strongly and we kind of assume it's there. Um it's related to the notion of conscious will. And I like to distinguish AKA free will? Well, I was just going to say, I like to distinguish conscious will from free will. Um only because free will um by my definition is a much more complex thing and I I we could actually talk for a long time and I could explain why I think there's not much freedom in free will. Um but that free will is is something that in some sense I can agree that the the brain has. It's it's a complex processing system. It's responding to all kinds of stimuli and ideas and can can change and mutate and and and make decisions as a processing device for lack of a better word. Conscious will is the idea that consciousness is the thing that is that is the will. That consciousness is the will. So, we have again, it's related to to these questions that I that I ask in the beginning of my book. Um is consciousness doing something? And we feel that consciousness is behind our willed actions. When in fact, there's a lot of neuroscience to suggest that it's it's actually the reverse that it's that it's at the end. That all of this processing happens, a decision gets made and then we're kind of the last to know. Um I have a chapter in my book called along for the ride. Um which can also be distressing to to people when they first hear it. people get freaked out. I I get it too actually, but in ultimately I actually think it's very freeing and it doesn't mean you can't So, so the brain is not in any way a closed system. Um just because our conscious experience is of what the brain is doing um doesn't mean at all that the brain is not influenced by ideas. Um and you know, it it it and even in physical terms, as you said, you can you can have a brain tumor that will dramatically alter what your conscious experience is. Um, but more importantly, um, for for this type of discussion, you know, if I yelled and said, "Oh, that that beam is about to fall on you." That's an idea that just gets communicated through language that suddenly changes your brain. So, your brain is is a physical system, but my words, my ideas get in and it completely changes the structure of your brain so much that you're going to jump up. Like, I could get you to jump up just by transferring that information. The thing that I think is is a true illusion is that consciousness comes first, and consciousness is is again wrapped up in this idea of a self. So, that there's this self that's kind of floating free from the material world somehow, um, and is initiating everything that happens. And I think that is a is is a false view. And so, we could talk about some of those studies. Um, the earlier ones are are more controversial. The most recent ones are are less and I think are the most interesting, actually. The most recent study that I read about, um, came out of Germany and um, so so most of these studies, I should say, basically show that um, at the level of the brain, scientists can see um, markers or activity that can that that reveal to them you're about to make a decision or make a movement, um, and before you have become conscious of it. Um, so, the most recent study was um, subjects were in an fMRI. So, an fMRI is an MRI with that tracks blood flow. Um, and the subjects were given two numbers and then given a choice whether to add or subtract the numbers. And there's there's a special kind of clock that's almost like a second hand going around, um, a a regular clock, so that they can mark that what their their job is to have the experience of making a decision I'm going to add or I'm going to subtract and know where on the clock that that decision happened. Um and then they actually go go ahead and do the math. Um so through fMRI, um neuroscientists were able to detect up to 4 seconds prior Whoa. when not only so they were able because they could see, you know, different parts of the brain, they were able to detect different types of processing. They could tell when that person would make the decision and what whether their decision was to add or subtract. So that gives us a very different sense. And and the truth is a lot of neuroscience that comes to us is giving us this picture. We can't we we should we should have digest digested this a little bit more than than we have already that there is a sense in which we are kind of just experiencing life play out. Um I don't know if I answered your question. You you did. I mean, look, this is this is the exploration that I was hoping for. What becomes interesting to me in that is I think part of the reason that we haven't digested that more is what are you supposed to do with that? It's like some part of it is, okay, wait, it there there definitely like how how does one make sense of this? Okay, I am literally truly me, Tom Bilyeu. I am completely prepared to say that I am simply a chemical processing plant that runs on algorithms. I have no problem with that. But there does seem to be what I'll call the overwatch mechanism. There is some level of awareness, I'm sure my prefrontal cortex, some level of awareness that is watching things and saying, um it through and and I'm very fine with given where I was born and the things I've encountered and all of that that it has built these beliefs. Okay. So I have sort of a default setting. But now once I have that thing, that thing can go in and make changes. So, I have this sort of overwatch algorithm processing machine that's been built up over my experiences, but it also has the ability to self-reflect and ask Absolutely. based on my value system, which is changeable, by the way, based on my changeable value system, am I thinking about this in the right way, or do I want to change something? Sure. And it has the ability to change. Now, it has the ability to change. all we're all still talking about the brain, the the the idea. And I think even the way you're describing it is partly a shift in the way we tend to think about it, which is there's a concrete self um that is responsible for those changes, rather than it's all brain processing. And the the brain, again, is not is not static, it's not walled off from its environment, it is an ever-changing, ever-evolving very complex system. It's the most complex thing we know of in the universe. Um but that just the fact that we can absorb um the idea that it is brain processing, and that our experience of how that brain processing is functioning is not necessarily accurate. Um I I think is useful for letting go of some um I think deeply damaging psychological ways and pat- patterns of thought that we can get ourselves into. Um but also just on on the science side, and on the study of consciousness side, it can start to get us to see how human beings and brains in in general are possibly not that different from other processing systems in terms of consciousness. You talking about other animals? Other animals and beyond. So, it you know, it opens up this window onto Yes, well beyond in both directions. So, beyond as in plants. Um plants are something that I that I talk about in my book in detail. It's crazy. Crazy. And and fascinating. own children? Right. And so, actually, the reason I brought up plants in the book was not because I think plants are conscious, although this all really makes you wonder. It was It was actually to redefining things. No question. But, it was for me it was actually to to make the opposite argument, which is that this complex behavior that we see in plants, it's much more complex than we realize until we started studying it, um is very closer to and more related to human behavior than we also previously realized. And now we know this is true um mechanistically, too. So, it in terms of the DNA. Um Give people some examples. Okay. So, so just to to go on this this path, um Daniel Chamovitz uh wrote this book, What a Plant Knows, which I highly recommend. Um and he talks about um this collection of genes that plants have um that evolved so that they can sense whether they're in the light or in the dark. It's the same set of genes that we have um for detecting light and dark. And then, of course, in us it's much more complex and it's the related to circadian rhythms and and all kinds of other things. But, um so, there there are behaviors that are incredibly interesting. Um I can I can talk a little bit about the underground tree communication. Um I just want to make clear that the the the larger point is in my first question in my book when we're talking about behavior, behavior as evidence of consciousness, um if we see this level of similarity in behavior in other systems, um and it's very hard to get conclusive evidence of a system being conscious if it's not a human being who can speak and talk to you about it, um we have to start to to really ask the question whether consciousness goes much deeper than than we imagine. Um but I actually I brought up plants because I think it makes us um it makes us second-guess whether all of the behaviors we see in human beings that we say has to exist um ha- so- sorry, consciousness has to exist for them to be there. Um if we don't need consciousness if plants don't need consciousness to exhibit similarly complex behaviors, then we we've we've we're we could be thinking about things wrong. Yeah, okay, this is interesting and I want to go a little deeper on this. So, one of the things you talk about in the book is that plants will preferentially send nutrients to seedlings that they know came from them versus other seedlings that they can actually read that somehow. Yeah, this is So, these are specifically Douglas fir trees in um in Canada. Suzanne Simard has done some fantastic work and has a TED Talk explaining some of this work. Um she was studying the underground tree um inter-tree communication mostly facilitated through um mycorrhizal networks, which are fungal networks, which is also incredibly fascinating. Um where they share carbon um with different species of trees. And at at some times of the year um you know, the Douglas fir needs more carbon at another time of the year another species may need and they actually kind of send signals about when they they're in need of carbon and and share carbon. Um but yes, then so so seedlings will will start to grow. And some of them have come from these you know, specific trees, some of them have come from other trees, but there are ways that the she calls them mother trees can know which trees have sprouted from her own seedlings, which are her kin. And she will I shouldn't say she. Um but these mother trees will send more carbon to their own kin. They will send um stronger defense signals. This is another thing that's actually interesting I didn't mention that trees send defense signals to each other as well. If there's a you know, poisonous thing that's growing in the area they they will um send uh chemical signals that warn other trees of of dangerous um other dangerous species in in the area. They will send more of those signals to their own kin. They grow their roots differently so they'll actually make more room for the roots of their kin. Um all of these things that um to us would be behavior that gets described as psychological behavior. Mhm. Um and that we assume we need consciousness for. To put it very simply I'm I'm making the point that you can't have it both ways. Um that if we're going to use these behaviors in humans um to be evidence of consciousness we then have to question how far down it's going and if not, which in some ways is a more interesting question, if not then what is it um that's different about consciousness? If we are these systems that are kind of going along in the same way that plants are. So ivy ivy is one thing that's actually very interesting um to study. It changes its rate of growth and direction depending on something that it can it can grow around and cling to. Um if those types of processes don't require consciousness maybe we're wrong in thinking that all of the complex behavior in humans requires consciousness and that there's there's another explanation for it. And what would that other explanation be? Uh I mean the most the most likely one to me is um that it's actually much more fundamental and that it goes That consciousness itself is a fundamental property of the universe. Yes. Okay. it very well. Yes. And now I want to talk about So if it is a field like gravity Mhm. how do we test that? Like how does one like right cuz it at least breaking through our intuition to get to that insight then opens it up to being tested. Yes. Um because that's one where it's like, okay, now I'm I'm I'm so uneducated on this stuff like I can't tell you one way or the other if this is plausible, but my limited brain goes, yeah, that's not possible. Right. No, me too. But like Me too, which is why I keep saying I'm split 50/50 on it and one reason is, I mean, my intuitions go so strongly against it. It's it's really through breaking through intuitions and following logistical pathways and talking to other scientists. So, I should also say that this idea that that consciousness could be a a fundamental feature of the universe, could be another in a sense another property of matter um that exists in all matter because it's just a fundamental property, so it exists. And and again, to clearly distinguish consciousness from complex thought. The these ideas in no way suggest that atoms or electrons have any kind of thoughts or plans or anything human-like. They're nothing like a human. Um I sometimes will say we we we wouldn't expect a rock to write a novel or to sing opera. That's not what atoms configured in that way do. Um and if there is some level of experience associated with the atoms in a rock, we would not expect it to be anything like what we experience. It would be completely unrecognizable to us. Um but all of this thinking falls under the umbrella term of panpsychism. Um which is a term people should know because historically that's the term that's been used. I don't like the term. I get it. It's super woo-woo and makes it sound like I think from a scientific perspective, we can just simply work toward um it not being taboo to ask these questions. So, it should just be legitimate to ask the question could we come up with a theory in which consciousness is fundamental because it's been so difficult, actually impossible to to date, um to come up with a theory of how complexity or how processes in the brain give rise to consciousness, is it possible it was it was there to begin with? Well, I'm definitely leading you down a garden path. So, where I want to get to So, this is the moment in the book where if you hadn't set me up with something earlier, I would have been like, "Peace. I'm out." yeah. Um it was you talking about the delayed measurement experiment. And I thought, "Wait a second." So, is this the first time you encountered that that thought experiment? Yes. So, I knew about the double slit experiment. Yay! I was so blown away. My moment of awe, like just unbelievably cool to think that that I could have existed this long and so fundamentally misunderstand the nature of things. So, that was cool. But, then you took it to like a whole 'nother level. Well, and by the way, physicists feel that way about it, too. I mean, quantum mechanics is something that is deeply mysterious and a tremendous source of awe and mystery for anyone who finds that um you know, inspiring and and and fueling. There there's a lot now to read because, you know, progress is being made, but it's still something that that is really dumbfounding to scientists, as well. So, I think if you walk people through what the delayed measurement experiment is, then then they will been a while. Hopefully, I can do a good job. Well, to get cuz I just read your book literally twice. So, I will fill in any gaps from your own work, by the way, that you might not remember. But, um the what it will do, I think, for anybody who's really listening is make you go, "Oh, there are things I don't understand." And once I'm in the realm of, "Oh, there are things I don't understand," then it is quite possible, "Well, I can't grab it from an intuition standpoint, our greatest breakthroughs in science have always been the moment where you can shed your intuitions and and really see the thing for what it is." Yes. Um so, I think we should probably start with the double slit experiment because many people are not familiar with that. Um and if you do show notes I can I can supply some visuals that might might help cuz it's it is actually very difficult to to get just through a person one person explaining it to another but I'll do my best. Um so light most people know um it we are understanding is that it can act like a particle and it can act like a wave. So there are photons um which are the the individual particles of light um which have wave-like properties and particle-like properties. So so the experiment is set up um very basically they're they're shooting um photons one at a time um at a screen and in between um the the photons that are being shot out and and the screen are two slits. Um and so if you were going to put through a continuous light source you would see a wave pattern on on the other side. The light is kind of going through um both slits and ha ha has a wave interference pattern. Um I don't know if I need to explain more of that but but basically So so So when So normally when you if you just have the screen there you shoot the light through two slits what you see when it gets recorded if there's you know photographic material that records um these photons you see um bar bars where the photons have hit um where they're weakest or lightest at the edges um but they're it looks as if you pushed water through these slits in terms of how it gets recorded. So there's there's no clean delineation between what slit it went through there's just a whole pattern along the screen. Which is not what you'd expect That is a wave-like pattern. So it has a pattern to it but it's a pattern of a wave. So, then it turns out that if you shoot one photon at a time and you measure which slit each individual photon went through, you have a different pattern on the screen. And all of a sudden, it looks as if you were shooting individual pellets and some of them go through the right side and some of them go through the left side and there's no interference pattern at all. They just form two slits. Now, right now you've already given people enough to have their brain leaking out of their ears, so I want to say it one more time to make sure people understand. You take these double slits, you shoot a single photon through it. Don't measure it. You get an interference pattern on the back as if you have pushed a wave through both slits. Now, do the exact same thing again, but this time put a camera up, whatever, measure it. And all of a sudden, it's a single [ __ ] photon. Right. That That's crazy. That's one of those where I'm like, "What?" Yes, so Just watching it changes its properties? Like, that doesn't seem possible. Right. So, it's I I would say it's measuring it rather than watching it and and some people have have interpreted this in ways that I think are um we just we simply don't know the answer, but but some people have said it requires consciousness, which I don't think we have any evidence for that at all. Um but clearly some interaction with other matter in the room um whether consciousness is present or not absolutely has an effect. And this is this is what quantum mechanics was born out of quantum quantum physics. Um so, there are many different interpretations uh of these strange things that we see. Um many worlds is something that maybe some some of your audience has has heard of string theory. Um has been around for longer, but they're they're, you know, this is just scientists trying to to understand what what's going on here. Um so, the physicist John Wheeler um proposed a thought experiment based on on this um based on the this experiment and the fact that we know that light so there's a there's a phenomenon where light goes around a quasar and causes an illusion I'm I'm forgetting the term but an an illusion of I think it's gravitational lensing. Yes, thank you. So if there's a quasar and in between us and the quasar is a black hole the the light will bend and it will give the illusion to us that there are two quasars rather than than one because the light bends and and causes this this illusion to take place. His thought was um if we were to measure which side an individual photon which side of that black hole the individual photon went around um that would change that would essentially change the past. um Because that thing's been traveling for millions of years. Yes, so it's path right takes place over millions of years. um just by measuring it will then give it a distinct location in the same way that it gives a distinct location by measuring it when it goes through the slits. But millions of years ago. And so this was right. So in some sense and we don't know how to explain this in terms of the fundamental nature of reality and whether this means there are you know endless copies of the universe and the universe kind of splits every time a quantum event happens whether there many dimensions of space I mean this gets into string theory which I'm not an expert on any of this. I'm explaining it as best I can but I I I'm not a physicist and and probably shouldn't shouldn't be explaining any of these experiments but the implications and the results so this was a thought experiment and then they actually were able to do the experiment so it was confirmed. That's where I literally was taking notes in the book and I was like this was confirmed experimentally. What? Yeah. Like that this this is So there's there's something we we do not understand. Fundamentally do not understand. understand about the fundamental nature of of matter and what matter is and what light is and these are these are great mysteries. So um if when I when I really stop and think about like what the experience of consciousness is, what it would look like if we if panpsychism is true and there's sort of consciousness all the way down Mhm. what it it the question that it begs for me is why is consciousness as an emergent property so problematic? Why where do people get hung up because in my very limited mind and I'm I am very prepared to accept this is just ignorance on my part but when I think about basically panpsychism would postulate something along the lines of hey you're getting all these low levels of consciousness and as they come together their combinatorial effect is it gives you some unique property and that can manifest as a tree, it can manifest as a dolphin, as a human. It's different you know amounts of and different types of consciousness coming together in different cell types and all that. So it's essentially purely a biological explanation how it manifests so differently. But why do we have trouble with the postulation that the human brain just an emergent phenomenon. Right and and that the the lights coming on really does feel like a gray scale to me. It does not feel like one moment there is and one moment there isn't. Like if you've ever seen Have you seen a baby Did you ever watch Blackfish the documentary? No. Don't it will hurt your heart in ways I can't explain but I will give you one cool punchline. When they go to capture baby orcas the pod is insanely intelligent about how they try to hide the babies cuz they know they want the babies. They already understand that. They like split up and like some swim high and some swim low trying to hide the baby. So crazy. And then they stay and like scream and cry as they take the baby away. It was so gut-wrenching. I could not [ __ ] believe it. So you to your point about what evidence do we need to be like, "Oh my god, that's conscious." Right. I'm willing to say, "Yo, that's clearly conscious. So now let's slide down all the way we get to ants." And I'll be like, "There was There was never a moment where it was yes, no, but there's definitely the qualitative estimation of what their experience is like. Now Now is so removed. I don't really get it anymore." And then sure, it slides on into something I can't I can't comprehend. Right. Where does it blink out of existence? I'm going to guess at a nervous system because there does seem some need to detect pressure. You have to have some kind of cell that sends some kind of signal saying that I'm experiencing pressure at even like the most basic level. So to me there it would seem Yeah. And by all means shut me down at the end of this conversation. mean the the truth is that many scientists have that exact intuition. And and I would say most scientists think that the explaining it as an emergent phenomenon is the way to explain it. And in fact, Sean Carroll, the physicist um who I just recently spoke with, that that's the way he would describe it. Um there are there a few reasons why there are problems with that. Um What we There are many ways I could take this at this point and I know we're we're limited on time. Um One issue is just the description of an an emergent phenomenon in science. And it There are two things about it. One, it is a It is um something that is observed from the outside. So, it's a an emergent um property is a property that you can you can quantify from the outside. Um consciousness is part partly what makes it so mysterious is that it has this internal character, that it's not something that can be viewed from the outside. Um we didn't talk about locked-in syndrome, but but looking at someone with locked-in syndrome is is a good way to kind of jostle your intuitions. Um briefly, this is someone who had brain damage. Um so, that they're completely paralyzed, but it has not affected their their conscious or mental life really at all. So, they have as full a conscious experience as you and I are having right now. Um are able to to think clearly, perceive everything, see things in the room, hear everything, but they're completely paralyzed. So, that they're unable to communicate anything. Um and the the um neuroscientist Anil Seth actually recently posted this this picture that's very interesting, which is just the human nervous system without the rest of the body. And he said something to the effect of this would be conscious um if it were alive. And it looks like the roots of a tree, right? And I'm not saying it is. It's it's a very different type of system, but the truth is we can't necessarily get information about a conscious experience always. So, we assume because we are complex creatures and we are our our conscious, we assume that it it is a complex phenomenon and we assume that the more something is like us, the more likely it is to have consciousness. I think I think that that is um assumption that may or may not be true, but it's it's really just an assumption. We have no evidence for that being the case. Um and seeing someone in locked-in syndrome tells you definitively um I I talk about um the the writer Jean-Dominique Bauby in my in my book. Um he in this condition of locked-in syndrome, he was able to um figure out a way to write. Um, his caretakers noticed that he he in fact actually had one point of mobility, which was his his eyelid. Um, he was able to control his eyelid. Um, and many people in locked-in syndrome do not have this, but he happened to be able to move his eyelid. And so they figured out how he could type out the alphabet with certain ways of blinking, and he literally wrote this beautiful book that was turned into a film. Um, in this state. So, but without that eye blinking. So, this is a man who can write a book and can experience everything that's happening in his room and has no ability to communicate. So, we we certainly can't rely on communication and behavior to tell us how how how um, possible it is that there's that there's consciousness there, but emergence. So, emergence is a is a physical phenomenon that can be witnessed from the outside. And it's a complex phenomenon. It comes out of complexity. And again, we have no evidence that consciousness is due to complexity. It very well It very well may be and I and I am I am really split 50/50 on this. And the way you described it, um, I completely my intuitions align there. And I think it's why we need to spend some time challenging our intuitions because the the evidence is actually not there. And there are many reasons to think and and and many reasons why explaining this mystery um, make there's a better path. There seems to be a better path to explaining it if it's a property that already exists in matter. Mhm. Um, not sure how well I answered that question, but No, well, this whole thing I mean, your your intuitions are are the intuitions that that most people share and many scientists share and um, yeah, it's the reason I I I take the time to do as much as I can to undermine them in the book because I think we're those intuitions are likely leading us in the wrong direction. Um, and at the very least, we've gone in that direction all this time and we haven't gotten any closer to understanding how it is that non-conscious matter, that these atoms in the universe, um, that had had no consciousness all of this time, somehow come together in a way It's It's actually, when you look at the details, it's very hard to see how the addition of an experience associated with that processing, um, come comes into being at any point, why why that would be. Mhm. Anika, I am so glad that you're exploring this topic and that you belong to a rare group of people that are, I think, entering the public awareness more and more, that are capable of writing a New York Times best seller and that are picking topics that other people just can't for their livelihood, they can't touch. So, I'm so grateful that you wrote this book. I really, really hope that, um, it, in a very enjoyable way, jars people out of their, um, some of their intuitions and assumptions, um, because I really think that the base assumptions people make about their life and the way their mind works holds so many people back from living a life that could be far more enjoyable and include far less suffering. Yeah. Um, but yeah, thank you. It really is wonderful, wonderful book. Um, where can people find you online? Where can they get your book? just my my name, annakaharris.com, a n n a k a harris.com. Um, my book is available everywhere books are. Um, but yeah, and the best way to find out about my work, um, and and other work that I do, um, in addition to my book, is it's all on my website, so. Nice. All right. What is the impact that you want to have on the world? Mhm. I think bringing more awe and curiosity. I could probably I could stop I could go on but that that's that seems like a a good one. Uh awe and curiosity I think we can we can always have more of and I will take that all day. All right guys, trust me when I say that she brings the awe and the curiosity and what a wonderful entrance into that world. I cannot recommend her work enough. It is really extraordinary and hopefully um the success of this first book will get her to do more and more in this vein I guess. Not first book but first book aimed at adults. So, very excited by what she's doing. She has a children's book like I said earlier I wonder so be sure to check that out as well. And if you haven't already subscribed, be sure to do so and until next time my friends be legendary. Take care. Monica, thank you so much. you. This was really fun. Hey everybody, it's time to talk about all of our favorite subjects, mental health. Is there something holding you back or preventing you from achieving your goals or even just interfering with your happiness? Do any of you suffer from depression or anxiety? As a lot of you guys know, I've suffered from anxiety for years and trying to tackle something like that on your own is not always the optimal strategy. But a lot of people are super nervous to try out therapy or they don't really know where to start or they're just plain embarrassed. But now there's a service called BetterHelp that makes therapy more accessible and affordable. BetterHelp is professional counseling done securely online using your computer, tablet, or mobile phone through video calls, phone calls, or text messaging with licensed therapists who are certified by their state's board to provide therapy and counseling. It is not self-help and it's not a crisis line. It's an online service available worldwide and it has a massive network of counselors who have a broad and diverse range of specialties. So, you can get a counselor with the sort of expertise that might not even be available in your local area. Better Help assesses your needs and matches you with a licensed professional therapist within 24 hours. You can log into your account anytime to message your counselor, and Better Help also has group and our sessions every week where members can learn in groups directly from licensed counselors on multiple topics like relationships and ways to overcome anxiety. Especially if the thought of seeking help makes you nervous or embarrassed, be sure to check out the over 60,000 positive reviews posted on the Better Help site, and that's Better Help h e l p. Better Help is committed to making it easy for you to access the therapeutic help you need even if you have never gone to counseling before. It's free to switch therapist, it's more affordable than local therapy, and they even have financial aid available if you need it. Better Help wants you to start living a happier life today. Visit betterhelp.com/impact, and again that's spelled better h e l p, and join over 500,000 people taking charge of their mental health with the help of an experienced professional. Better Help costs just $65 per week and financial aid is available for those who qualify during the sign-up process. As an Impact Theory viewer, you can get 10% off your first month. So, visit betterhelp.com/impact and get the help you need today. All right, guys. If you need this one, please give it a shot. Take care and be legendary. But first, you can notice that anxiety isn't even that unpleasant. I mean, it's it's so close to excitement in its actual physiology that really the difference between excitement and anxiety is more or less just the the the framing. It's just the story you're telling yourself. You know, if you felt