Stories
4 comments
There is substantial interdisciplinary research (psychology, neuroscience, cognitive science) showing that narrative thinking is structural to human cognition, not just cultural or trained.
Bruner (1986) found that people naturally encode experience as stories to make sense of causality and intention.
McAdams' (1993) empirical personality research shows people construct "life stories" as part of their identity formation and mental health, and narrative coherence correlates with psychological well-being.
Oatley & Mar (2008) found that reading stories activates brain regions tied to theory of mind and empathy, suggesting that stories simulate real social experience, reinforcing narrative cognition.
Schank & Abelson (1977) did early AI (symbolic rule-based systems meant to model human reasoning, not machine learning as we know it today) and cognitive psychology work showing people interpret events through stored "scripts" (story-like mental structures).
Damasio (1999) found neuroscience evidence that consciousness depends on constructing an ongoing autobiographical narrative linking emotion, memory, and perception.
Immordino-Yang & Damasio (2007) found through neuroimaging studies that emotion and social understanding rely on brain systems engaged by narrative thought.
Humans seem wired to understand the world through story structures. The post's critique is partly right (entertainment can distort expectations, and our stories change us, too) but it might be incorrect to broadly declare that narrative thinking itself is primarily the result of an external (and somewhat artificial) pressure. It appears to be innate.
Bruner (1986) found that people naturally encode experience as stories to make sense of causality and intention.
McAdams' (1993) empirical personality research shows people construct "life stories" as part of their identity formation and mental health, and narrative coherence correlates with psychological well-being.
Oatley & Mar (2008) found that reading stories activates brain regions tied to theory of mind and empathy, suggesting that stories simulate real social experience, reinforcing narrative cognition.
Schank & Abelson (1977) did early AI (symbolic rule-based systems meant to model human reasoning, not machine learning as we know it today) and cognitive psychology work showing people interpret events through stored "scripts" (story-like mental structures).
Damasio (1999) found neuroscience evidence that consciousness depends on constructing an ongoing autobiographical narrative linking emotion, memory, and perception.
Immordino-Yang & Damasio (2007) found through neuroimaging studies that emotion and social understanding rely on brain systems engaged by narrative thought.
Humans seem wired to understand the world through story structures. The post's critique is partly right (entertainment can distort expectations, and our stories change us, too) but it might be incorrect to broadly declare that narrative thinking itself is primarily the result of an external (and somewhat artificial) pressure. It appears to be innate.
Great perspective. Maybe the goal isn’t to abandon stories, but to use them more consciously—to inspire curiosity and empathy rather than false expectations. Awareness like this keeps technology and art in balance.
Society tells us lots of stories, but they are manipulative. Western society is based largely on kings and priesthood and dictators and supermen all trying to be God.
To me the Lotus Sutra is a story. One of equality, meaning and purpose. I posted some concerns in the "Technology as a dystopian Sci-Fi movie replay" thread [0]
Everything is process. Technology is beneficial or harmful depending on people. By rejecting the philosophy of unmitigated greed and hoarding wealth in favor of a philosophy of generosity and compassion, technology will find its better uses.
I have always felt that technology wants to be liberative, as in "Computer Lib; Dream Machines" by Ted Nelson and Kevin Kelley in "What Technology Wants" and even Jobs and Woz making exciting interactive, creative devices. I was in college when the HP-35 came out. Minicomputers were just hitting the streets, with the PDP-8 "the first minicomputer to sell for under $20,000" (Wikipedia)
I built microcomputers, namely the old IMSAI. I started work in optical engineering, but with the ups and downs of aerospace, found those self-taught computer skills a lot more portable. But that grounding was important. Computers and computing are still means to me rather than ends, and I have always loved open source software, because anyone and everyone can benefit from it.
Now that companies are jamming AI onto our lives and devices with no way to turn it off (soon the switches will vanish), open source is the way to be free of forced technologies, But! people need to choose it, and we techies need to make it simpler and friendlier. It's all a matter of choice, whether to amass wealth making spy devices and insane inhuman things like high frequency trading or by helping others with our gifts.
And for crying out loud, don't send money the way of the manipulative sickos.
[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45870658
To me the Lotus Sutra is a story. One of equality, meaning and purpose. I posted some concerns in the "Technology as a dystopian Sci-Fi movie replay" thread [0]
Everything is process. Technology is beneficial or harmful depending on people. By rejecting the philosophy of unmitigated greed and hoarding wealth in favor of a philosophy of generosity and compassion, technology will find its better uses.
I have always felt that technology wants to be liberative, as in "Computer Lib; Dream Machines" by Ted Nelson and Kevin Kelley in "What Technology Wants" and even Jobs and Woz making exciting interactive, creative devices. I was in college when the HP-35 came out. Minicomputers were just hitting the streets, with the PDP-8 "the first minicomputer to sell for under $20,000" (Wikipedia)
I built microcomputers, namely the old IMSAI. I started work in optical engineering, but with the ups and downs of aerospace, found those self-taught computer skills a lot more portable. But that grounding was important. Computers and computing are still means to me rather than ends, and I have always loved open source software, because anyone and everyone can benefit from it.
Now that companies are jamming AI onto our lives and devices with no way to turn it off (soon the switches will vanish), open source is the way to be free of forced technologies, But! people need to choose it, and we techies need to make it simpler and friendlier. It's all a matter of choice, whether to amass wealth making spy devices and insane inhuman things like high frequency trading or by helping others with our gifts.
And for crying out loud, don't send money the way of the manipulative sickos.
[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45870658
I can't recall the last book I read where the main character or anyone "wins." I watch a couple movies a year and those also tend to lack the hollywood ending. HN is probably the closest I have ever come to social media and my news intake mostly stops at the headline. I don't see these choices improving my life much over the lives of most people I interact with and I don't see those people being deluded by their happy endings.
I do think life is a narrative, but I am not sure if we are using narrative towards the same ends.
I do think life is a narrative, but I am not sure if we are using narrative towards the same ends.
These stories are fun, but wildly misleading. We have basically brainwashed ourselves through our entertainment into thinking life is a narrative.
In real life, the good guys often do not win. The bad guys many times never get what they deserve. There usually are no surprise plot twists that will save us.
We are a species playing with technology that has developed at an exponential rate around us. The white collar recession developing now as a result of automation, off shoring, and AI could radically change the life many are used to. Artificial intelligence could far exceed human intelligence and simply wipe us out. Or a small terrorist group could use a genetically altered disease that is incurable to wipe us all out.
I think our ancestors who did not have all the entertainment we have today had a more realistic view of the world. Reading very old books is quite helpful to try to reconnect to reality.
We are like children playing with matches in a bomb factory.
I don’t really have solutions to this. I don’t own a tv, but I still read a lot of fiction. And waste time on Facebook and news websites.
I have a hard time envisioning a world without me, although that has been the default state of nature for thousands of years.
Do we accept Ted Bundy’s proposition that technology advancement is destructive toward our species? Or do we embrace Sam Altman’s utopia that supposedly will arrive with general artificial intelligence? Or will we simply be wiped out as the author of Superintelligence suggests? Or maybe none of this will occur.
Can we cut ourselves off from the artificial stories that continually draw our attention? TV shows, movies, fiction books, social media and online video, news websites, etc? Would doing so be beneficial?