Y'all talk a lot about consciousness. So I thought this might be interesting:

https://www.the-hinternet.com/p/spreadsheet-selves

I've attached an OCR'd version of the PDF they link as well.
--
¡sıɹƎ ןıɐH ⊥ ɐןןǝdoɹ ǝ uǝןƃ
ὅτε oi μὲν ἄλλοι κύνες τοὺς ἐχϑροὺς δάκνουσιν, ἐγὰ δὲ τοὺς φίλους, ἵνα σώσω.
https://www.economist.com/the-economist-explains/2024/02/07/a-spreadsheet-for-the-soul

A Spreadsheet For The Soul
Are you legally woke?

THE ANCIENT GREEKS were not conscious. At least, so argued Princeton 
psychologist Julian Jaynes in the 1970s. Jaynes’ theory of the ‘bicameral 
mind’, which involves a model of divine commands similar to schizophrenia, is 
heavily disputed: but his polemic inspired this columnist to reflect upon 
reflecting.  Speculation on such matters is typically reserved for the more 
psychologically- (or psychosomatically-) inclined; but altered states of mind 
are surprisingly quantifiable. Can human consciousness be indexed?  The 
Economist, in its Jaynsian hubris, has given it a go.

To use the index, it is helpful to clarify our terms.  ‘Consciousness’ is a 
notoriously wishy-washy term: there are several _infuriatingly —_ unhelpful 
‘know-it-when-you-see-it’ definitions (named after one US Supreme Court 
Justice’s 1960s attempt to define pornography). Other attempts, notably by 
philosophers, are mind-numbingly dense. Thankfully, all but the most radical 
definitions concede there are some moments in a human life where the ‘I’ is 
present.

Think of the thuddening climax of a work of literature; or the rush as a 
prospective romantic partner takes your hand. Your breathing becomes audible; 
time oozes by, and later on, your memories of that moment are vivid, 
polychromatic. But these moments are rare. As any retiree will tell you, life 
goes by without you noticing. The American anthropologist David Graeber 
concurs, arguing that humans are almost always lost in a fug of mechanical 
movements, performed — quite literally — absent-mindedly. Graeber cites 
neurological findings that, in an average day, an adult human is only truly 
conscious for seven seconds. The ninth-of-a-minute rule has since passed into 
legal precedent: an insurance provider drew on it to successfully avoid a 
payout in an Australian court in 2015.

The Economist initially imagined this seven-second benchmark would be too 
conservative to statistically measure: surely, every human would meet that 
definition of consciousness. But, as the interactive tool below proves, such is 
not the case. Our statistical model identifies three broad types of 
‘consciousness inhibitors’: environmental, psychological, and technological. 
Data was scraped from a range of sources, from OECD databases to Meta quarterly 
reports.

Imagine a Burger King drive-thru operator at a busy service station. Her day is 
filled with environmental inhibitors: her 9-5 is consumed by the various 
activities involved with assembling Whoppers, or constantly taking orders from 
irate customers and jibes from irate managers. Her mornings and evenings are 
dominated by childcare, meal prep, ablutions and marital sparring: they offer 
scant chances for philosophising. Proustian ponderings before bed are blotted 
out by the roar of a nearby bypass. Perhaps a half-minute before her shift can 
be snatched to contemplate the sun-dappled leaves; but often she is in too much 
of a hurry for that.

The Economist used Al-created algorithms to calculate what proportion of the 
global population suffers from enough of the Burger Queen’s environmental 
inhibitors (like overstimulated working conditions, or noise pollution) to 
plausibly deprive them of even seven seconds of consciousness a day: the result 
is a depressing 40% of humanity. That 40% are overwhelmingly located in poor 
countries; but the next two consciousness-inhibitors affect the rich world too. 
Take the psychological inhibitors.

Before he found fame, the American novelist Stephen King was once in the thrall 
of cocaine and alcohol to such an extent he cannot remember writing one of his 
early works. It is reasonable to assume King would have not met the 
seven-second benchmark for many days in that period of his life; though he has 
(thankfully) cleaned himself up, many have not. How many people, at this 
moment, are experiencing mind-altered states? Whether addled by narcotics or 
tormented by withdrawal, or blocked from proper thoughts by stupor brought on 
by sleep deprivation?

Anxiety is ubiquitous across income levels, and even in the wealthiest 
countries chronic hunger and stress is surprisingly prevalent. All of these 
internal maladies stymie human flourishing in well-known ways: chronic stress 
slows the healing of wounds; sleep deprivation hastens the ageing process. But, 
though there is less empirical evidence to prove it, it is reasonable to assume 
each of the above factors also prevents human consciousness. Quantifying 
exactly how many seconds an insomniac is properly aware each day is tough: 
estimates at that precision involve guesswork. Nevertheless, our model assumes 
that people suffering from several psychological inhibitors, to a severe enough 
extent, would fail to meet the seven-second benchmark (especially to the extent 
where, like King, they would fail to produce any memories).

Once psychological inhibitors are accounted for, the proportion of legally 
conscious people shrinks by a further two-thirds at least. (Less conservative 
statistical models, even at this stage, shrunk the conscious population by a 
factor of six).  The psychological inhibitors, though present in developed 
countries, heavily correlate to income. The final inhibitor is the most 
egalitarian of the three: rich and poor are victim to technological inhibitors 
of consciousness (also known as ‘brainrot’). King and the Burger Queen may have 
been forced into their consciousness-eroding states by lack of opportunity; but 
bona fide monarchs are equally liable to be tempted into dullness by the lure 
of the For You Page.  According to a study in World Psychiatry on the “online 
brain”, 45% of US teens are online ‘almost constantly’, and US adults do not 
fare much better.  Short video and microblogging sites are most often invoked 
in invectives against online brain; less discussed is ‘audio brainrot’, like 
the increasingly popular long-form podcasts, which also drown out conscious 
thought. Finally, when people have time and inclination to perform cognitive 
tasks themselves, they are now exporting that to ChatGPT (this is a vicious 
circle: AI use, as an MIT study recently concluded, atrophies human critical 
thinking).

None of this is exactly news: cable TV has been producing similar mind-dulling 
effects for decades, and if you think podcast conspiracy theorists materialised 
in 2016, Rush Limbaugh is laughing beyond his grave. Yet added together they 
represent a significant inhibitor.

Explore this model and its conclusions in the tool below. By the default 
metrics, combining environmental, psychological and technological inhibitors, 
the Economist has concluded that the number of people on Earth who meet the 
legal definition of consciousness is equivalent to the population of 
Guinea-Bissau.

Tool failed to load

In an essay, the Irish author Sally Rooney wrote of a ‘flow state’ reached by 
the most consummate sportspeople, where “all distractions, even the ego 
ADVERTISEMENT itself, melt away”. Of more pressing concern to this 
publication’s readers is perhaps the prospect of their profits, not their ego, 
melting away. Does the lack of human consciousness present an issue for the 
economy?

A workforce “receptive” to managerial messaging is “not the worst problem a 
company can have,” says Ben Akron, a consultant. Nor is a pliant client. (More 
than one of the industry professionals interviewed for this article expressed 
interest in a future index of particularly non-conscious consumer markets.)

The managerial classes are not untouched by this shortage of being. Take this 
newspaper. Your columnist conducted an informal poll scoring Economist writers 
on the index. Nearly all, including her, fail to meet the legal definition of 
consciousness.  This paper’s editorial staff did not seem unduly concerned: 
they can guess how their readers score.
.- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... 
--- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom 
https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
archives:  5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
  1/2003 thru 6/2021  http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/

Reply via email to