Sensible Erection | Neuroscience and Magic

Wednesday, 19 September 2012

quote [ Magic tricks work because humans have a hardwired process of attention and awareness that is hackable ]

I love hackable things. Being hacked is fun sometimes, if a bit scary. Maybe that's the best part?

Sam Harris seems to believe
http://www.samharris.org/free-will
that some results in neurological experiments prove that free will is an illusion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroscience_of_free_will

Personally I think that he's unnecessarily conflating the idea of volition with that of consciousness. What do you all think?

Also it seems I can't use anchor tags in extended. WTF am I doing wrong?

[sci&tech] [by happiest_sadist@4:35amGMT] [+3 Interesting]

Comments

DesertWanderer said @ 5:05am GMT on 19th Sep
no content in main link. just a book's website?

happiest_sadist said @ 6:15am GMT on 20th Sep
Sorry, it's my mistake. I posted based on their book and some stuff the book said about their site. I should have checked it out more thoroughly and / or added porn.

But there's videos:

http://www.sleightsofmind.com/media/

SnappyNipples said @ 5:06am GMT on 19th Sep
so...I shouldn't post that video of a guy hacking at his junk with a hatchet?

lilmookieesquire said @ 5:15am GMT on 19th Sep
I think SE has some automatic something or other html that automatically turns urls into links (made, at the time, for large copy/paste porn posts)

sanepride said @ 5:24am GMT on 19th Sep
Anchor tags will work if you omit the http: part of the URL in the link.

happiest_sadist said @ 9:51am GMT on 19th Sep
Thanks. I'll remember that.

sanepride said @ 3:54pm GMT on 19th Sep
...also useful for image tags and embedding video etc. in extended. I got this from ComposerNate, so credit where it's due.

EPT said @ 3:31pm GMT on 24th Sep
Only in the Extended part of the post, to facilitate ye olde linkdump porn posts.

Jaxon said @ 5:45am GMT on 19th Sep [Score:5 Interesting]
Here is something about magic. About Teller.

http://www.esquire.com/features/teller-honor-system-1012

bruceski said @ 9:10am GMT on 19th Sep
I can't seem to go to page 2 or 3. Anyone else having this problem or is it my system?

mrklipp said @ 8:17pm GMT on 19th Sep
Do you have javascript turned off?

bruceski said @ 9:34am GMT on 19th Sep [Score:1 Informative]
Also, Shadows is a trick once seen never forgotten. I have been impressed by the skill involved in many tricks, I have been stupefied by some, Shadows is one of a very small number to which I do not want to know the trick. Usually I'm a puzzler, I like to figure out the tricks and admire the skill and cleverness to come up with them (though I would never intentionally spoil it for someone else).

ckfahrenheit said @ 7:10am GMT on 20th Sep
I've been actively avoiding any explanation of Shadows. I never want to know.

EPT said @ 4:29pm GMT on 24th Sep
I love the magic trick, then I love learning how it's done - I'm really interested in attention and perceptions. By 'how it's done', I don't just mean the main gimmick, but how the whole thing goes together, with all the soft skills and whatnot.

5thEarth said @ 7:42pm GMT on 19th Sep [Score:1 Underrated]
Arguing whether or not there is free will is, IMO, stupid. Since the end results of free will vs. no free will are indistinguishable, why bother distinguishing them?

dreamingzephyr said @ 11:50pm GMT on 19th Sep [Score:1 Interesting]
It helps one forgive oneself.

happiest_sadist said @ 6:14am GMT on 20th Sep
Sam Harris argues that if free will doesn't exist then it's morally incorrect to punish people for bad behavior. I'm paraphrasing, and it's been long enough so that I might not have it quite right- but that's one possible difference in the results of free will vs. no free will.

Also certain religions insist on free will, and in some sense could be 'proven wrong' if it can be definitively shown not to exist. I don't think it can, and I don't think it would have much impact even if it happened.

pleaides said @ 8:22am GMT on 20th Sep
Sam doesn't quite say that we ought not punish bad behaviour, just that we should distinguish better what states of the brain lead to such behaviour, and only punish with that greater understanding foremost in our minds. His recent essay 'Life Without Free Will' clarifies his views on the matter.

As to whether free will is worth studying, I find NaNthEarth's contention odd, given that we study almost everything else, studying the essence of human motivation seems pretty sensible, especially if the discussion leads to a more advanced and less ham-fisted justice system. Advances in this area could well lead to a reduction in human suffering of magnificent proportions, even if Sam is wrong.

Free will is a shallow attempt to skirt around the problem of theodicy, to allow the pious to maintain their belief in a loving god despite the regnant evil evident in his supposed creation. I completely support the advent of a science of the human mind, such that our understanding of our own natures might be based on observable facts, rather than the fatuous scriptural exegisis of a forgotten age.

hellboy said @ 6:05pm GMT on 21st Sep [Score:1 Insightful]
The problem with the "no free will" thing is that it's a sophomoric philosophical argument, as it's unprovable. It's theoretically possible that from an objective viewpoint all of the factors that play into an individual's decision-making process are apparent and therefore it is possible to predict with 100% certainty what their choices will be. But as such an objective perspective is unattainable (never mind the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle), the individual remains a black box and there is no measurable way to distinguish between a person with free will and a person without - if the illusion is completely convincing, then it is not an illusion. Thus it's a moot point.

Besides, if there's no free will then whether or not we punish someone for something is also beyond our control. Either we will or we won't, depending on factors beyond our control or even full awareness. It's just not a useful perspective for problem solving, any more than solipsism is useful for anything other than making freshmen heads explode with the brain-in-a-vat conundrum. It's possible that everyone I know is a figment of my imagination. There's no way to test this, so therefore it's not a useful philosophical position.

That doesn't mean it isn't worth examining the causes of behavior, trying to better understand the human decision making process, and addressing the true origins of social problems. But as a comprehensive philosophical argument, it's a dead end.

(as NaNthEarth

EPT said @ 3:30pm GMT on 24th Sep
This needs a +1 Insightful for each paragraph.

hellboy said @ 8:18am GMT on 28th Sep
Especially that very last line, it's sheer brilliance.

maryyugo said @ 8:10pm GMT on 19th Sep
Some illusions are quite startling. Some are more subtle. Here's a recent "new" mentalist with a good technique! The first is a fairly standard but not easy illusion:

(starts around 1:00)

Watch this second one carefully. I couldn't come up with any method by which it could be done reliably enough to use in a competition:

bruceski said @ 9:17pm GMT on 19th Sep [Score:1 Insightful]
The audience one is pretty clear. "simple geometric shape" = triangle or square as the first reaction, then he eliminates square. As more influence when he says "I'm going to try and influence..." he holds up three fingers for a moment. "Different shape AROUND it" while making a circular motion. He made that motion a few other times too.

The first part though, that's impressive. Hell, both are impressibve, I can just catch one of em.

maryyugo said @ 11:08pm GMT on 19th Sep
Yeah, I didn't think much of the audience thing but it was just a filler. The real illusions were much better. I know a magician can see easily when facing the opposite direction using mirrors in his palm and that he can see around blindfolds (though the one this guy used was pretty convincing). But even if he could see a little, it doesn't explain the illusions. But people don't appreciate this stuff. This magician got fairly far but he didn't make even the final round of the competition which was won by ... a dog act!

ckfahrenheit said @ 7:16am GMT on 20th Sep
old reset

EPT said @ 3:40pm GMT on 24th Sep
Magic tricks work because humans have a hardwired process of attention

Oversimplistic. Magic works more because it is performed in a way that deceives our expectations and stereotypes, which are learned. If playing cards were made of a material that floated in air, then we'd be well and truly used to it and yawn when a magician made one float as a trick.