Why do we imagine things that arent real? What is the reason we do this?

Why do we imagine things that arent real? What is the reason we do this?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aphantasia
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Why do we perceive things that *are* real?
Because it provokes useful behavior.
Why do we perceive things that aren't real?
Because it provokes useful behavior.
Also there's no reason for a 100% true to reality perceptual system to evolve, you don't need anywhere near 100% to thrive and reproduce, just getting some basic glimpses at the loose gist of reality is enough. And the sloppiness of an imperfect system like that can allow for the apparent sense of things in the absence of actual objects for your senses.

Also this is kind of similar to how you can ejaculate even though you aren't even inseminating a woman e.g. by rubbing your penis with your hand. Evolution doesn't care about perfect accuracy, it just gets you systems that can do the job well enough, and these systems can be hijacked for other purposes than the ostensible main factor for them emerging in the first place.

You didnt answer my question but im happy to discuss indirect realism.

Tbh i dont like ur idea. Theres a deeper reason than sloppiness. Why dream
Why imagine. If kit werent important the braon wouldnt waste energy.

Also you dont explain why imagination often onvolves plausible things. More often then not. It goes by laws. Imagination has narrative. It isnt random fragments.

>If kit werent important the braon wouldnt waste energy
Evolution isn't a conscious designer. It doesn't come up with the most efficient use of resources and build based on that. Processes and organs emerge piecemeal one step at a time and if it works well enough that the organisms survive and reproduce then it can persist as a process or organ into the future.
Part of the optimism of future AI is contingent on the expectation the brain is massively redundant and that we don't actually need to reproduce every little bit of it in order to reproduce what it does artificially.

Good question but it's more /x/ than Veeky Forums

Nothing to do with imagination.

My point is i can see he brain working more efficiently. And in line with current thought

I think ur view of the brain is wrong. It does well foe its environment. No a.i. has ever been brought up into a complicated human world.

All skandhas are empty

>i can see he brain working more efficiently. And in line with current thought
So what? There is no reason to expect the most efficient structure possible is what will emerge and persist as biological processes or organs. Go look at a giraffe's laryngeal nerve if you want proof of concept for this.
>Nothing to do with imagination.
It has everything to do with imagination, you just have some weird agenda and don't want to hear anything that doesn't corroborate that agenda.

I said future AI, and no, it's not wrong, the brain definitely is massively redundant, that's why you can even cut out an entire brain hemisphere and still sometimes end up with a person who can function somewhat decently.

You misinterpret what i mean by efficient. I dont mean works best. I mean marginal efficiency. Abd your view of the brain is ridiculously big compared to some other views i seen.

I said nothing to do with that because youve not explained it. Youve just given a shutty everyday example. Said its not perfect. No connection to anything. Ffs.

>I dont mean works best. I mean marginal efficiency.
I didn't mean "works best" either. The idea evolution always maximizes efficiency is mistaken, evolution doesn't have the benefit of designing and deploying an efficient structure all at once, anything that emerges and persists needs to have worked every step of the way, and that isn't the most efficient way of doing things. Also once something works well enough to persist there's no guarantee anything new will replace it. Again, everything needs to emerge in steps, and if the first step of something slightly more efficient emerges there's no reason to assume the slightly less efficient version of a trait would be wiped out on that basis alone. "Slightly more efficient" can turn out to be negligible in promoting survival and reproduction.
I explained it, you just didn't understand it, apparently because you're not a native English speaker.

Maybe there isn't a reason and it just happens. Not everything in life has to have a reason to be there.

The insemination argument? You made no logical connection just said it. Didnt explain it. My point is i have a muh simple explanation of imagination than any of you.

I did, but it's very clear you aren't a native English speaker. You have completely misinterpreted several different specific phrases now and your own writing is stilted and strange. You should try spending some time learning the language a little more before trying to start threads like this.

Im talking about the guy whonused ejaculation as an example. Its above.

Just explain your argument dude.

And why insult me. We are here for knowledge. Im not english. I hope you dont support trump. Are foreigners more stupid than english speakers?

How is this stilted?

""

Fuckin bully. You know shit. Shouldnt tolerate this shit.

Not everyone can do that
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aphantasia

Clueless trool cunt. Know shitm youll see ke in the octagon. Ill smash ur cunt in on prime time tv. Cunt.

Shut the fuck up

Fuckin knock ur noggin mate.