TED Community » Vilgot Huhn

More About Me

I'm passionate about

Comics/Manga, Movies, Science, Psychology, Philosophy, TED, Drawing

Talk to me about

Everything! At the same time!

People don't know that I'm good at

Pretending to have an opinion that I don't have. I have always been great at making arguments for things that I don't truly agree with. When we debate in school I'm good at whatever side.

Comments

• TEDCred score: +12.30 TEDCred reflects your contribution to the TED community.

• A comment on Conversation: What are three things you believed as a kid, that you stopped believing as you got older?

  Oct 4 2011: When the other kids at my daycare started to question santa claus my parents tell me I said "I don't think we should poke around in that". I guess I wanted to continue to believe in santa but I couldn't. That memory is so old I can't remember it, I've just been told that I said that. I didn't grow up to an eyes-closed-denialist either, I've given up most of my notions of wishful thinking and I'm totally into science and all that. But I still remember feeling really crushed about losing some of those beautiful-lies, and I think that feeling is important to remember.
• +1

  A comment on Talk: David Deutsch: A new way to explain explanation

  Sep 1 2011: Great talk!
  
  Btw did he diss Steven Pinker there at the end? I think that's a bit unfair, it's not like Pinker is unserious about his science, and I don't find it at all improbable that genes would affect personality and that personality would affect whether one leans towards an utopian or tragic world view. Very different from claiming that we genetically inherit opinions. I mean it's not like he's saying something crazy like there's a "republican-gene" in there, that would just be stupid so of course we can't know of such a gene that "causes opinions". But there can still be proof that genes most probably have something to do with personality, even tough we can't know exactly which genes, talking about which genes is generally pretty stupid since what a gene "means" has to do with the context of the other genes in our DNA.
  So don't diss Pinker, you're both on the side of science and if we're going to talk about easy variability then the cultural/social-construction/nuture side of the nature vs nurture debate also has a lot of problems. Human nature and psychology is complicated stuff. It's not strange that we don't have precise and absolutely irrefutable explanations like in physics. And that's what makes it interesting.

• A reply on Talk: A robot that flies like a bird

  Jul 25 2011: It is awesome! That's why! :D
• +1

  A comment on Talk: Kathryn Schulz: On being wrong

  Apr 19 2011: Amazing talk. I remember seeing her at theRSA last year, I liked that talk too, but this talk was way better!
  Still, here's the RSA link if you're interested: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0NNelDf0F-o
  
  I think the message she's trying to spread is one of the most important pieces of wisdom there is. Think of all the conflict and bloodshed caused by the strong conviction that "We're the ones that are right! Anyone that disagrees must be ignorant, stupid or evil!". However I'm not sure that this is something caused by socialization in our education system, (we're taught that we're supposed to get things right) I think it has to do more with human nature. But what do I know, maybe I'm wrong. ;)

• A reply on Conversation: What are 10 things YOU know to be true?

  Mar 20 2011: Ah, good point with the 2+2 thingy! Still, there's a lot more possible false statements than true ones. I thought Qazi made it sound like some sort of balance between true and false. I just thought it created some confusing implications.
  
  I haven't really read anything about this subject but I disagree that math is a result of our limited interpretation of the universe. There is just no way 2+2 will ever equal 5. Rather, "our interpretations is a result of the universe", of the laws of physics and of evolution. Truth is truth, no matter if we're around or not. (Tough I feel like I'm arguing against an argument you're not making here...)
  
  Maybe we will never completely understand the universe, we're always going to have to assume some things, but I'm pretty sure we're closing in on something. And there are things that we actually know to be true. Yes, some people would argue against that. But what good would believing that nothing is true ever do? Not that I don't think these questions are important or interesting but I just feel like saying that "maybe the laws of the universe will change tomorrow", "maybe nothing is certain" will just get in the way of any practical understanding of the world.
• +7

  A comment on Talk: Sarah Kay: If I should have a daughter ...

  Mar 20 2011: She must be the most wonderful woman ever! I now believe in angels.

• A reply on Conversation: What are 10 things YOU know to be true?

  Mar 20 2011: I promise you that 2+2 will never equal 5. Even if you are convinced it is so, it doesn't change anything. No matter what you think, thinking doesn't make things true or false. Time changes a lot of things but the things that are really actually true will always be true. The laws of the universe never changes. At least not to our knowledge.
  
  Also, maybe I've misunderstood you, but I think that "something must be false for the opposite to be true" can be a bit misleading and confusing. 2+2=5 is false but it's not the opposite of 2+2=4 which is true.
• +2

  A reply on Conversation: Where do our thoughts come from?

  Mar 8 2011: Regarding Descartes "I think, thus I am" I remember someone on youtube talking about this. He said mentioned that we often think that it's the I that does the thinking, he thought it might be the other way round. It's the thinking that created the "I". The self doesn't control the cognition, it is a product of it.
  The alternative statement was "I think 'I', thus I am"
  I liked it, thought I might share. :)

• A comment on Conversation: Where do our thoughts come from?

  Mar 7 2011: Here's an example to illustrate how I think new thoughts might appear:
  
  Let's say that first I'm acting under the assumption that what I see is real and true, and everything I remember happened exactly as I remembered it.
  Then one day I have an unusually realistic dream. I could have sworn that it was real! When I woke up I was chocked to find out it was a dream. I feel disoriented and cheated by my own mind.
  And then the natural question follows "what if I'm still dreaming? How can I KNOW that this isn't still in my dream? "
  When pondering the question further, I might ask "how can I know that all my life hasn't been a dream?", "what if some of my memories have gotten mixed up with memories of dreams?" or "Maybe I'm just a character in someone else's dream? probably a butterfly or maybe a dog!"
  
  I chose that example because I think everybody has thought that thought at some point in their life. (Maybe they had thought about it a little bit but not so carefully before they saw The Matrix) But they're not alone in thinking that thought, it occurs in the unrelated minds of different people. And it's not so strange, I think the line of reasoning here comes pretty naturally. Often thoughts are less unique than we'd like to think (I'm not at all saying that people are identical but still, our minds follow the same mechanisms of reasoning). I myself don't believe that the world is a dream or anything.
  
  I think new thoughts surface when something messes up our earlier assumptions about the world. Like when two fields of knowledge meet. Idea (or more likely "set of ideas") + Idea can become a new Idea. Tough not necessarily, some things are just completely unrelated. But it's all about seeing things in a new light.

• A comment on Conversation: How will you take part in JR's TED Prize wish?

  Mar 7 2011: I would like to take part but I can't think of any issue I'd like to stand up for, any person that should be shared or any good location to put the portrait. But maybe I'll figure something out later.
  -other thoughts.
  About changing the world with art. Sometimes when I paint something in school, instead of brining it home I tape it to the wall at some random place in school. It's against the rules but I can't see why it would upset anyone and if it seriously upsets them they can just take it down. (Also, they probably don't know I put it on the wall without permission! Haha! I win!) I don't think it's changing the world but hopefully it's making it a little bit prettier :)