(Audio version here, or search for "Joe Carlsmith Audio" on your podcast app.)
> “There comes a moment when the children who have been playing at burglars hush suddenly: was that a real footstep in the hall?”
>
> - C.S. Lewis
“The Human Condition,” by René Magritte (Image source here)
1. Introduction
Sometimes, my thinking feels more “real” to me; and sometimes, it feels more “fake.” I want to do the real version, so I want to understand this spectrum better. This essay offers some reflections.
I give a bunch of examples of this “fake vs. real” spectrum below -- in AI, philosophy, competitive debate, everyday life, and religion. My current sense is that it brings together a cluster of related dimensions, namely:
* Map vs. world: Is my mind directed at an abstraction, or it is trying to see past its model to the world beyond?
* Hollow vs. solid: Am I using concepts/premises/frames that I secretly suspect are bullshit, or do I expect them to point at basically real stuff, even if imperfectly?
* Rote vs. new: Is the thinking pre-computed, or is new processing occurring?
* Soldier vs. scout: Is the thinking trying to defend a pre-chosen position, or is it just trying to get to the truth?
* Dry vs. visceral: Does the content feel abstract and heady, or does it grip me at some more gut level?
These dimensions aren’t the same. But I think they’re correlated – and I offer some speculations about why. In particular, I speculate about their relationship to the “telos” of thinking – that is, to the thing that thinking is “supposed to” do.
I also describe some tags I’m currently using when I remind myself to “really think.” In particular:
* Going slow
* Following curiosity/aliveness
* Staying in touch with why I’m thinking about something
* Tethering my concepts to referents that feel “real” to me
* Reminding myself that “arguments are lenses on the world”
* Tuning into a relaxing sense of “helplessness” about the truth
* Just actually imagining differ