The Case Against Reality: How Evolution Hid the Truth from Our Eyes
- Downloads：6536
- Type：Epub+TxT+PDF+Mobi
- Create Date：2022-07-04 08:52:34
- Update Date：2025-09-06
- Status：finish
- Author：Donald D. Hoffman
- ISBN：0141983418
- Environment：PC/Android/iPhone/iPad/Kindle
- Download
Summary
Do we see the world as it truly is？ In The Case Against Reality， pioneering cognitive scientist Donald Hoffman says: No， we see what we need in order to survive。 Our visual perceptions are not a window onto reality， Hoffman shows us， but instead are interfaces constructed by natural selection。 The objects we see around us are not unlike the file icons on our computer desktops: while shaped like a small folder on our screens， the files themselves are made of a series of ones and zeros too complex for most of us to understand。 In a similar way， Hoffman argues， evolution has shaped our perceptions into simplistic illusions to help us navigate the world around us。 Yet now these illusions can be manipulated by advertising and design。
Drawing on thirty years of Hoffman's own influential research， as well as evolutionary biology， game theory， neuroscience， and philosophy， The Case Against Reality makes the mind-bending yet utterly convincing case that the world is nothing like what we see before our eyes。
Drawing on thirty years of Hoffman's own influential research， as well as evolutionary biology， game theory， neuroscience， and philosophy， The Case Against Reality makes the mind-bending yet utterly convincing case that the world is nothing like what we see before our eyes。
Reviews
Fereydoon
，
آیا ادراک ما واقعیت عینی رو نشونمون میده؟؟کم پیش میاد کتابی جهان بینی آدم رو به چالش بکشه یا کلا تغییرش بده ولی این کتاب این کار رو انجام میده （حداقل در مورد من） حرفی که دونالد هافمن در این کتاب میخواد بزنه جدید نیست و تا فلسفه بوده این حرفم هم بوده。 اینکه ادراک ما （حواس پنجگانه） نمیتونن واقعیت عینی رو ببینن و در عوض چیزی رو درک میکنیم که واسه بقا و تولید مثلمون ضروری و کافیهادله و مثال های فراوان در باب چرایی این موضوع میاره و در یکی دو فصل هم به این میپردازه که آیا اینکه ما واقعیت عینی رو نمیب آیا ادراک ما واقعیت عینی رو نشونمون میده؟؟کم پیش میاد کتابی جهان بینی آدم رو به چالش بکشه یا کلا تغییرش بده ولی این کتاب این کار رو انجام میده （حداقل در مورد من） حرفی که دونالد هافمن در این کتاب میخواد بزنه جدید نیست و تا فلسفه بوده این حرفم هم بوده。 اینکه ادراک ما （حواس پنجگانه） نمیتونن واقعیت عینی رو ببینن و در عوض چیزی رو درک میکنیم که واسه بقا و تولید مثلمون ضروری و کافیهادله و مثال های فراوان در باب چرایی این موضوع میاره و در یکی دو فصل هم به این میپردازه که آیا اینکه ما واقعیت عینی رو نمیبینیم و درک نمیکنیم به لحاظ علم فیزیک رد شدنی هست یا نه برای اثبات روی دو شاخه از علم دست میذاره که من روشون قسم میخورم یعنی تکامل داروین و فیزیک کوانتوم و از این جهت من رو خلع سلاح کردنقدهای بدی در مورد کتاب تو کامنت های انگلیسی خونده بودم واسه همین سطح توقعم روی کف بود ولی کتاب ثابت کرد که حرف برای گفتن دارهجالب اینکه خود نویسنده هم ادعای زیادی نداره و فقط شمارو به خوردن کپسول قرمز توی فیلم ماتریکس دعوت میکنهحرف جالب دیگش در مورد خودآگاهی بود。。 میگه اینکه ما نمیتونیم خودآگاهی رو رمزگشایی کنیم بخاطر اینه که تعریف و کانسپت درستی از مسئله نداریم و در اواخر کتاب اون کانسپت مناسب رو ارائه ولی خب تاکید زیادی هم روش نمیکنه و صرفا میگه برای شروع تحقیقات با نگاهی نو خوبه 。。。more
Mirko Liang
，
A lot to unpack and to reflect upon。
Eric Wojciechowski
，
This was a tough one to get through。 It’s full of maths and biological concepts and physics for which I simply do not understand。 I fully admit I had to supplement reading this book with presentations and podcast appearances of the author。 In essence， I needed a Cliff Notes version to dive deep into the material of this book。And in essence， the argument in the book is as follows: Evolution did not create a perceptual system to see， feel， taste or hear reality。 It evolved just good enough， using This was a tough one to get through。 It’s full of maths and biological concepts and physics for which I simply do not understand。 I fully admit I had to supplement reading this book with presentations and podcast appearances of the author。 In essence， I needed a Cliff Notes version to dive deep into the material of this book。And in essence， the argument in the book is as follows: Evolution did not create a perceptual system to see， feel， taste or hear reality。 It evolved just good enough， using shortcuts and life hacks， to get an organism to reproduce。 Moving genes on to the next generation is the only goal， evolutionarily speaking。 And for that reason， it takes way too much in resources to perceive the world as it is。 With that in mind， what exactly is the real world。 Hoffman doesn’t exactly have an answer。Hoffman speculates are perception is more geared like a computer desktop， a graphical user interface。 We see and interact with objects like icons on a desktop and not the actual ones and zeros that make up that icon。 We interact and perceive the graphics and icons， not the transistors， resistors， and mechanical parts actually doing the work in the background。This means we’re constantly interacting with a data structure， in time and space （which is just our desktop） but what lies behind that is unknown。 And there’s plenty of math and physics and experimentation to show this is correct。 As Hoffman says， the theory we’re dealing with representations （icons） is good enough to tell us this is true but not good enough to tell us anything about the transistors， resistors and mechanices working behind the curtain。Hoffman notes that the Theory of Evolution and Quantum Field Theory shows Space/Time is not fundamental which means there may very well be a programming， a mechanics behind our desktop we’re only starting to speculate about。That’s extraordinary。 Our we living in the Matrix？ Who knows？ But it sure explains a lot about what we’ve come to think regarding “paranormal” activity and glitches or sightings or feelings that seem outside of the normal， physical landscape。 Maybe because the normal， physical landscape is sort of an illusion。 Again， it’s beyond my level of comprehension to determine if Hoffman’s work is correct。 I’ll have to leave that to more knowledgeable people in their related fields to pick this apart。 But the data in the book and supplemental materials which will surely take up much of my time remains a worthy， continuing pursuit。 。。。more
Loren Picard
，
I picked up this book because it was referenced in another book I read。 When it arrived in the mail it showed prominently on its cover the following quote: 'Read this book carefully and you will forever change your understanding of reality。' -- Deepak Chopra。 I was disheartened。 Why couldn't the quote be from someone like Nick Bostrom or Max Tegmark？ Anyway， I plunged in and the book lived up to the Chopra quote。 Without giving too much away， the author builds a case for replacing spacetime and I picked up this book because it was referenced in another book I read。 When it arrived in the mail it showed prominently on its cover the following quote: 'Read this book carefully and you will forever change your understanding of reality。' -- Deepak Chopra。 I was disheartened。 Why couldn't the quote be from someone like Nick Bostrom or Max Tegmark？ Anyway， I plunged in and the book lived up to the Chopra quote。 Without giving too much away， the author builds a case for replacing spacetime and its objects with a theory called Conscious Realism。 Conscious Realism is an argument that says reality is made up of a network of conscious agents。 This is not to be confused with panpsychism。 The book contains mind altering stuff。 。。。more
Shania Rodgers
，
This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers。 To view it， click here。 Quantum and interface perception theories may seem very dark and mind binding but it’s actually very empowering！ Our eyes really only detect the external world in 2D but alter it into 3D so that it is useful for living！ Same goes for other senses， we smell and taste so that we don’t get hurt and see time one dimensional so that we can expand our lives in a way that we can understand without being so clouded with other data stimulants。 It’s scary to think that we can’t observe objective reality b Quantum and interface perception theories may seem very dark and mind binding but it’s actually very empowering！ Our eyes really only detect the external world in 2D but alter it into 3D so that it is useful for living！ Same goes for other senses， we smell and taste so that we don’t get hurt and see time one dimensional so that we can expand our lives in a way that we can understand without being so clouded with other data stimulants。 It’s scary to think that we can’t observe objective reality but in a sense we are provided such a powerful tool called our brain to build and have fun in our existence 。。。more
Richard
，
What I like most about the ideas is that it gives a direction to how you might study it further。 Force yourself to stop thinking in terms of time and space and run additional experiments with that in mindFor an up-to-date （2022） summary of his thinking， see his interview with Tim Ferriss （2 hours！） YouTube Don’t bother with his Ted Talk， which despite having millions of views， is old （2015） and doesn’t really discuss the physics angle。 What I like most about the ideas is that it gives a direction to how you might study it further。 Force yourself to stop thinking in terms of time and space and run additional experiments with that in mindFor an up-to-date （2022） summary of his thinking， see his interview with Tim Ferriss （2 hours！） YouTube Don’t bother with his Ted Talk， which despite having millions of views， is old （2015） and doesn’t really discuss the physics angle。 。。。more
Jesse Tilley
，
Had a few interesting takeaways and some great insights， but ultimately most of the content felt repetitive and irrelevant。 I found myself slogging through large sections waiting for the next thought-provoking idea。
Cheenu
，
A good thought provoking book arguing that what we see is an interface （like a desktop） rather than the true nature of reality。 I felt that this book was more philosophical rather than scientific but it still was an interesting read。
Clayton Chase
，
Mind bending and eye opening， an early and compelling effort to move beyond the inevitable doom of spacetime。 Here is just a taste:The interface theory of perception contends that there is a screen -an interface- between us and objective reality。 Can we hope to pierce that screen and see objective reality？ Conscious realism says yes: we have met reality and it is like us。 We are conscious agents， and so is objective reality。 Beyond the interface lurks no Kantian noumenon （a posited object or eve Mind bending and eye opening， an early and compelling effort to move beyond the inevitable doom of spacetime。 Here is just a taste:The interface theory of perception contends that there is a screen -an interface- between us and objective reality。 Can we hope to pierce that screen and see objective reality？ Conscious realism says yes: we have met reality and it is like us。 We are conscious agents， and so is objective reality。 Beyond the interface lurks no Kantian noumenon （a posited object or event that exists independently of human sense and/or perception）， forever alien and impervious to our inquiry。 Instead， we find agents like us: conscious agents。 Their variety dwarfs the dazzling diversity of creatures that have paraded the earth and bequeathed to its sediments innumerable petrified mementos of their sojourn。 We cannot imagine， concretely， even one new color。 We cannot hope to imagine but a fraction of the varied experiences enjoyed by this multifarious host of agents。 But despite our diversity， we share a unity: we are all agents， conscious agents。 。。。more
LT
，
Brendon April 22
AnarchoSocialist
，
While your intuitions will balk at the claims made here， the thesis is argued with such logic and reason that you will never see the world of your interface the same again。 If correct， the implications would be staggering。 Could not more highly reccomend this book！
Alina Yasnaya
，
By the middle of this book I got absolutely tired of the phrase （objective reality）， it is repeated so many times， you will get sick of it。In some ways， this is a book on evolutionary biology。 In some ways， this is physics and/or philosophy。 It almost goes into the psychedelic territory of "everything is connected and nothing is real， you are just interacting with computer icons"。 It is both interesting and boring。 There is a hypothesis that is being made here， and I didn't see too many argument By the middle of this book I got absolutely tired of the phrase （objective reality）， it is repeated so many times， you will get sick of it。In some ways， this is a book on evolutionary biology。 In some ways， this is physics and/or philosophy。 It almost goes into the psychedelic territory of "everything is connected and nothing is real， you are just interacting with computer icons"。 It is both interesting and boring。 There is a hypothesis that is being made here， and I didn't see too many arguments that support it very well。 But it's a fun exercise for the mind。 。。。more
shak
，
Lovely book。 DNF because it requires much effort that I do not have at the moment unfortunately
Tom Ngo
，
The portion of the title after the colon accurately portrays the book's central thesis。 The part before the colon is an overstretch。 A prospective reader can decide whether that makes the book more or less enticing。Missing from the title is what I consider to be the most profound and universal topic in the book: how the origin of consciousness is related to properties of the material world。 Hoffman's ideas in this book， in keeping with the trajectory of his career， are fresh and worth close atte The portion of the title after the colon accurately portrays the book's central thesis。 The part before the colon is an overstretch。 A prospective reader can decide whether that makes the book more or less enticing。Missing from the title is what I consider to be the most profound and universal topic in the book: how the origin of consciousness is related to properties of the material world。 Hoffman's ideas in this book， in keeping with the trajectory of his career， are fresh and worth close attention。For me， this was a thought-provoking read after Mind and Cosmos （nonfiction， Thomas Nagel）， Children of Time and Children of Ruin （fiction， Adrian Tchaikovsky）， What Kind of Creatures Are We （nonfiction， Noam Chomsky）， and Snow Crash （Neal Stephenson）。 Each of these books grapples with that same universal topic， each in its own way。 。。。more
Raunit
，
Brilliant arguments; will revisit in a year。
Malum
，
Fascinating theory， but the book is basically made up of almost nonstop strings of examples and facts backing it up。 It is well researched and interesting， but not necessarily an easy or relaxing read。
Ninemiki
，
I gave the book four stars although I think it deserves 5 stars in parts whereas two stars in others。 I didn‘t like all the mathematical formulas， probably because they were often quite hard for me to understand - this is definitely a book you cannot read when you are not fully focused。I want to re-read it in a few months time - let‘s see what kind of changes to the review I will add then。
G Curtin
，
We evolved for fitness， not reality。
Felix
，
too short
Rory Fox
，
Kant’s analysis of reality was mostly right， according to the author， although we can go further than Kant because of the insights of Quantum Mechanics。The book advances five main claims。Firstly， Kants distinction between ‘things in themselves’ and ‘what we can know about things’ is right。 When we look at an apple， we are having an experience of something， but we can never know precisely what we are experiencing。 All we can know， is what our senses tell us about the thing。Secondly， the implicati Kant’s analysis of reality was mostly right， according to the author， although we can go further than Kant because of the insights of Quantum Mechanics。The book advances five main claims。Firstly， Kants distinction between ‘things in themselves’ and ‘what we can know about things’ is right。 When we look at an apple， we are having an experience of something， but we can never know precisely what we are experiencing。 All we can know， is what our senses tell us about the thing。Secondly， the implications of Kant’s views are that reality is essentially an Interface。 The author tells us that when we see an icon on our computer desktop， it may look blue and square， but that’s just its appearance。 The code underneath isn’t blue and square， and nor are its functions （ie data storage， retrieval or manipulation）。Thirdly， evolution is right and so the natural world can be explained as orientated to produce and pursue ‘fitness’ rather than truth。 Human thinking is a product of evolution so humans think and act to sustain their existence and reproduce。 Truth， or accuracy， is irrelevant to thinking， unless it is conducive to fitness。Fourthly， not only can we know nothing about the nature of reality， but Quantum Mechanics gives us reason to think that there is no underlying reality。 When a person sees ‘the moon’ that is just a construction in the person’s mind （location 3494）。 Its triggered but there is no objective reality （or even space-time） in which the trigger exists， nor indeed any ‘causation’ which could explain what it means to talk of a triggering。 Fifthly， there is an exception to the non-existence of objective reality， in that conscious agents exist in reality。 So when you see a friend， you may be interacting with an ‘icon’ of your friend， but that icon is a portal to the reality of your friend’s consciousness。All of these claims are controversial， and the book is an attempt to justify them。 Kant’s distinction may seem plausible， but the reason people have been arguing about it for two hundred years is that it leads to philosophical problems。 If my knowledge of reality is just representationalist ‘ideas’ in my mind， then how do I know there is a reality at all。 Kant can lead to a radical scepticism。 The author doesn’t address the philosophical problems raised by Kant。The argument that evolution selects for thinking which is adaptively ‘fit’ rather than ‘true，’ may seem plausible within the constraints of evolution’s focus upon ‘fitness。’ But there is an embedded assumption in the book that fitness is a contrast to truth。 The examples of ‘fitness’ are typically examples of reducing information， not a human preference for untruth， over truth。 For example， we hear how the human eye receives millions of bits of information， but reductively selects around 40 bits to focus on at each point。 The author insists that ‘fitness beats truth，’ but what he argues for seems to be something more like ‘limited information beats information overload。’The author’s use of Quantum Mechanics to prove that objective reality doesn’t exist is controversial。 Yes there are physicists who support such arguments。 But there are also those who don’t。 The problem with using Quantum Mechanics as evidence is that the evidence base is so confusing， and it admits of so many differing interpretations， that people effectively smuggle their conclusions into their premises in terms of which interpretations of quantum mechanics they cite。And the final set of claims about consciousness seem very odd。 If there is reason to doubt that there is an objective reality， then why think that other people exist as separate consciousnesses？ If the moon is a figment of my imagination， why aren’t other people also。 To extent the author’s IT analogies， couldn’t’ reality exist of just a single consciousness which creates all the other consciousnesses as ‘non-player characters’ in its own game。 To put it another way， isn’t the more plausible conclusion of the author’s argument， solipsism。 Nothing exists except myself。Overall the book makes some interesting points， but it was repetitive， whilst also failing to press hard enough and address the objections which its claims give rise to。 。。。more
Alexei
，
The title is somewhat misleading as the author does not actually deny reality its existence。 What he affirms is that nothing in it is the way we see it - or hear and feel for that matter。 The task of our biological evolution was to adapt us to this world， not to know it as it is - which the author proceeds to demonstrate quite convincingly。 What we perceive is the interface， the icons， not the actual innards of the computer which is the metaphor he uses。 It seems initially that he is undertaking The title is somewhat misleading as the author does not actually deny reality its existence。 What he affirms is that nothing in it is the way we see it - or hear and feel for that matter。 The task of our biological evolution was to adapt us to this world， not to know it as it is - which the author proceeds to demonstrate quite convincingly。 What we perceive is the interface， the icons， not the actual innards of the computer which is the metaphor he uses。 It seems initially that he is undertaking to prove the metaphysics of Kant， and indeed he is aware of the similarity。 But somewhere in the middle he starts enlightening us about the actual nuts and bolts of reality， apparently without noticing that he is contradicting himself。 Great beginning， but the ending disappoints。 。。。more
Nathan Hoyt
，
First I have to say that I did enjoy reading this， but I have to admit that I think I only understood one or two levels deep on what has several more layers。
James Hylands
，
This is a really interesting book。 Despite the title， it isn't advocating solipsism。 The idea which is core to this book is that; although intuition might suggest that evolution would tend towards developing senses and moreover a cognitive interpretation of those senses which tends towards a more accurate representation of reality; that this is in fact not the case。I ended up buying this for my grandmother for Christmas。At the end of the book， the author goes on to explain a representation that This is a really interesting book。 Despite the title， it isn't advocating solipsism。 The idea which is core to this book is that; although intuition might suggest that evolution would tend towards developing senses and moreover a cognitive interpretation of those senses which tends towards a more accurate representation of reality; that this is in fact not the case。I ended up buying this for my grandmother for Christmas。At the end of the book， the author goes on to explain a representation that doesn't rely on the elements of reality which he lays out to be flawed。 This isn't well listened to as it is quite mathematical。 COVID permitting when I can next visit my grandmother it will be nice to read this off of a physical copy。 。。。more
Haiko Van Der Leeuw
，
A lot of this book makes a lot of sense， but some parts are incredibly far fetched and ridiculous。
L R
，
This is an extraordinary book， presenting ideas any thinking person should consider even if later rejected。 The concept that physical reality is in effect "not really there，" or at least "not what we think it is" is quite old， and gaining currency as of late via theoretical physics， but Hoffman in many ways for the first time starts to develop means of turning this assertion into science - that is， testable hypotheses。 If nothing else I find it astonishing that one person can speak fluently abou This is an extraordinary book， presenting ideas any thinking person should consider even if later rejected。 The concept that physical reality is in effect "not really there，" or at least "not what we think it is" is quite old， and gaining currency as of late via theoretical physics， but Hoffman in many ways for the first time starts to develop means of turning this assertion into science - that is， testable hypotheses。 If nothing else I find it astonishing that one person can speak fluently about such a wide variety of topics。 I recommend it for anyone who has ever asked "Just what is reality？" 。。。more
Nicco Reggente
，
What Kant would write if he was a Cognitive Neuroscientist。 Absolutely fantastic and visceral perspective-forcing read that can bring an "aha moment" to even the most seasoned of philosophers of mind。 Hoffman does an absolutely superb job at illustrating the degree to which our percept is divorced from "objective reality"。 What Kant would write if he was a Cognitive Neuroscientist。 Absolutely fantastic and visceral perspective-forcing read that can bring an "aha moment" to even the most seasoned of philosophers of mind。 Hoffman does an absolutely superb job at illustrating the degree to which our percept is divorced from "objective reality"。 。。。more
Tutankhamun18
，
//3。5//Very interesting themes of conciousness， reality， truth， perception as an evolved trait that allows us to survive and reproduce， reality as explained by quantum physics vs how our brain perceives it。 Raises alot of questions， boggles the mind and really makes you。 Compellingly explained， but nontheless certain aspects aee difficult to understand。 Very， very interesting introduction to this line of thought。
Continuum Hypothesis
，
！！Gave up around 50% mark。 Very interesting ideas an solid arguments （esp。 evolutionary part， somehow unlike other non-falsifiable sim。 theory articles）。 Needs lots of thinking while reading
Sean S
，
Trippy stuff。 Everything in my body tells me what the author says is nonsense， but I still find it challenging to dispute it。 Everything as icons and interfaces may be the way it is， but I still wonder what the implication of this information is， what it changes。 I also struggle with all the caveats and loopholes provided to shore up various conditions and corner cases。The vision/eye chapter was compelling stuff。 Wish the rest of the book read like this。
Rachel
，