Thread by @EpistemicHope

Most of the self reflective, self-changing, decision process that is me, is NOT conscious.

The thing that chooses my actions is the thing that is ME.

I am (mostly) the unconscious thing.

And I'm somewhat surprised that other people seem to be conceiving of themselves really quite differently?

https://twitter.com/sam_havens/status/1364821794520059905?s=20

(I'm particularly disturbed that, in the other thread some people seem to be saying something like [possible strawman]:

"Eh. I'm changing all the time, and rarely as the result of my conscious choices. My conscious mind is just rationalizing some other process anyway.

So if I'm altered by some outside force (like nano-machines), that's just business as usual.

Whatever."

This seems like a startling view that is making a mistake in drawing the boundary between self and world.

I am mostly the unconscious thing, and THAT is the thing that is violated by neuron-editing nano-machines.

That might seem in conflict with another recent thread, which suggested that I, more than most people, identify with the voice in my head.

That also seems true, but they don't seem to be in conflict to me. In fact, they're closer to complimentary.

https://twitter.com/AnnaWSalamon/status/1364327740577513477?s=20

I'm trying to figure out how to express that non-contradiction.

It's something like, my conscious mind and unconscious mind are working together, for the same things? And it's all part of the process of "me".

My conscious verbal mind is definitely not a just a PR center. And I know that, because I can hear, or generate, arguments and considerations that are compelling, that actually cause me to change my actions.

And noticing that, I can tease out which things _I_ care about, by noticing which arguments and considerations feel compelling.

More concretely:

I definitely do a thing that I tag as "telling stories", which often feels like composing an argument, as if to someone else, to justify myself.

But I can also back up and consider which situations, if they obtained, would cause me to feel or act differently.

Like if I notice that I'm "telling stories", about how doing X is _justified_ (usually to some particular person that I'm imagining), I'll flag this and keep going.

"Telling stories" isn't bad! I just want to know that I'm doing it.

But eventually, I'll become curious about why I care about the thing I'm arguing for.

I'll start offering myself hypothetical scenarios, varying the situation along different axes, and seeing how I feel about each one. I check which situations would cause me to act differently.

And thereby I can uncover my true cruxes.

Not what's the best argument for X, but why do I actually want X / why do I think that X is a good idea.

And then, knowing that, my conscious mind starts planing, taking my true reasons for X into account.

Instead of just justifying X, I can maybe find better or easier solutions that achieve my true motivation for X.

Or in this post I give another example of an introspective methodology.

In the second example in particular, I gain some insight into what is motivating my planning, so I get to plan BETTER.

musingsandroughdrafts.wordpress.com/2020/01/04/you…

There's some attitude of, whatever my motivation for doing something, those are MY motivations, and I own them, and then figure out how to best hit them.

Sometimes my true motivations are at odds with other things that I care about, or ways that I want to be. In which case, I own those too.

https://twitter.com/EpistemicHope/status/1354247090843439106?s=20

This is the flip side of not berating yourself: sometimes the processes or heuristics you're running can stand to be improved. But it almost doesn't compute to be fundamentally bad, since whatever you choose stems (modulo bugs) from what you value.

https://twitter.com/EpistemicHope/status/1364270730431459328?s=20

If you own everything that has motive force within you, then you aren't a verbal loop attached to and rationalizing a mysterious, semi-aligned, decision process.

Instead, you're a coherent thing that desires and thinks and plans and acts.

But this depends on self-honesty. You have to admit to yourself, and allow yourself to be aware of what you want and believe.

And that takes courage, and the self-trust that whatever is true, about you or the world, you'll find a way to deal with it.

(Which, incidentally, is tied to with being honest to other people, at least for me. The habits of stretching the truth or giving white lies to others, carry over in my relationship with myself.)

Whatever is there, if I own it, I can serve it, and my other needs, better.

I don't want to suggest that I'm perfect at this. As I said, it takes courage and skill, and I would be willing to bet that there are parts of me that I am denying or ignoring.

But my fundamental default attitude is that it’s all me, and I will be the better for embracing it.

So I'm not just my verbal loop, and I'm not just my urges. I'm the whole reflective system.

@threadreaderapp unroll