Venkatesh Rao ☀️
@vgr
Theory: humans like to maintain uncertainty at a constant level. If reality gets too predictable we tell more plausible make-believe stories. If it gets less predictable we tell fewer stories. If a coin always comes up heads, we tell stories of a world where it always comes up tails.
8 replies
0 recast
0 reaction
vaughn tan
@vt
is it uncertainty (a very broad category) that humans seek or ambiguity (a particular type of not-knowing where there are multiple possible readings, some of which might be more favourable than current perceived reality)?
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Venkatesh Rao ☀️
@vgr
Hm not sure this nuance is something humans are sensitive to at the unconscious level I think my hypothesis applies. Your categories are good but strike me as constituting an acquired discipline. Almost a protocol for uncertainty. I recall that uncertainty vs ambiguity paper you shared years ago which I cite a lot.
2 replies
0 recast
0 reaction
vaughn tan
@vt
mmm idk anecdotally, we respond to diff kinds of not-knowing differently (embodied x cognitive response) and it looks quite sensitive (wrote about this: https://vaughntan.org/why-not-knowing-feels-so-hard) i might rephrase provisionally as: humans want to preserve the [level x type of not-knowing] that they expect
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
vaughn tan
@vt
also consciously trying to not use the word "uncertainty" for now because it covers so many different types of non-quantifiable partial knowledge — ambiguity is just one of them
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
