How do transformative experiences challenge rational decision-making?

They challenge rational decision-making because the person making the decision will become a different self after the experience. This new self would potentially judge the decision differently than the original decider, making it impossible to fully predict outcomes.

Why is regret rare after major life decisions like having children?

Regret is rare because the self that experiences the outcome is fundamentally changed. The new self values its current state and desires, making it difficult or impossible to access the perspective of the self that would have regretted the decision, thus making the decision seem 'right' in retrospect.

Can we rationally choose what information to expose ourselves to?

Yes, it can be rational to control your information intake, especially if you know the potential negative effects or can predict your reaction. However, the challenge arises with transformative experiences where the nature and impact of the information are unknown.

How does empathy relate to doing the most good?

Affective empathy (feeling others' emotions) can lead to cognitive bias, while cognitive empathy (understanding others' perspectives) is more reasoned. However, even carefully intended empathy can lead to losing oneself. Rational analysis for doing the most good often conflicts with emotionally compelling causes focusing on single identifiable victims.

Why do we discount the importance of our future selves?

We tend to discount our future selves because they feel remote, like strangers. Our decisions are often based on immediate experience and feelings rather than a long-term projection, leading us to prioritize present pleasures over future well-being and consequences.

Can painful experiences lead to positive transformation?

Yes, while painful during the experience, some ordeals (like recovering from cancer) can reorient priorities and foster new strengths, leading to a valued new self. While the self before the experience might not want it, the self that emerges may not regret it, highlighting the subjective nature of value after transformation.

What are the ethical implications of directly changing our values?

Directly changing our values, possibly through future neurotechnology, presents a paradox. We would be making decisions about changes that would alter the very standard by which we judge those changes, entering murky territory where our current judgments might not apply to the future self.

Key Moments

Transformative Experiences: A Conversation with L.A. Paul (Episode #327)

Sam Harris

Science & Technology5 min read50 min video

Jul 21, 2023|29,490 views|450|154

sam harris sam harris podcast waking up podcast waking up waking up with sam harris sam harris waking up waking up sam harris sam harris jordan peterson sam harris joe rogan author neuroscientist philosopher

Save to Pod

Key Moments

TL;DR

Philosopher L.A. Paul and Sam Harris discuss how transformative experiences change the self and challenge rational decision-making.

Key Insights

Transformative experiences fundamentally alter the self, making it impossible to fully grasp their nature beforehand.

Rational decision-making faces challenges with transformative experiences because the future self making the judgment is different from the current self making the decision.

Regret is complex in transformative experiences; the absence of regret doesn't necessarily validate a past decision, as the self evaluating it has changed.

Controlling access to information, like avoiding disturbing images, can be rational if the effects are known, but problematic when the outcomes are uncertain.

Empathy, particularly cognitive empathy, involves understanding another's perspective without losing oneself, though transformative risks remain.

Philanthropy often clashes with rational analysis due to emotional biases, leading to prioritizing emotionally salient causes over more impactful ones.

Our relationship with future selves is often discounted, similar to how we view distant philanthropic causes, due to psychological distance.

The nature of objectivity and subjective experience is crucial when evaluating life's value, especially concerning temporally arranged events and personal growth.

DEFINING TRANSFORMATIVE EXPERIENCE

L.A. Paul defines transformative experiences as profound events that fundamentally alter the self. These experiences are characterized by an inherent unknowability of their essential details beforehand. Crucially, they don't just change one's perspective but destroy aspects of the current self and create a new one. This duality means that understanding the experience is only possible *after* undergoing the transformation, posing unique challenges to how we anticipate and evaluate such life events.

CHALLENGES TO RATIONAL DECISION-MAKING

Transformative experiences challenge standard rational decision-making frameworks. When deliberating about such an event, like becoming a parent, the person contemplating the decision is different from the person who will later live with the consequences. This temporal disconnect means one cannot reliably imagine or compare the future self's preferences and values. Any attempt to predict satisfaction involves projecting current values onto a future self that will likely possess entirely different ones, creating a dilemma for rational choice.

THE COMPLEXITY OF REGRET AND VALUE

The absence of regret after a transformative experience, such as having children, is not necessarily proof of a 'right' decision. It can be a consequence of the self having irrevocably changed. The self that would have existed without the experience is inaccessible, making objective comparison impossible. This circularity, where happiness post-experience validates the decision, highlights how personal values can shift so profoundly that past judgments become irrelevant to the transformed self.

NAVIGATING INFORMATION AND EPISTEMIC AGENCY

Deciding what information to engage with presents a complex epistemic challenge. It can be rational to avoid certain data, like graphic images of violence, if the negative impact is predictable and undesirable. However, the risk lies in not knowing the nature of an experience before encountering it, especially concerning transformative possibilities like religious belief or psychedelic use. Proactively shielding oneself from potentially transformative but unknown experiences can be a form of epistemic control, akin to Ulysses tying himself to the mast.

EMPATHY AND THE RISK OF SELF-LOSS

While empathy, especially cognitive empathy, is crucial for understanding others, it also carries risks related to transformative experiences. Attempting to deeply inhabit another's perspective, even in a reasoned manner, can lead to an erosion of one's own self. This mirrors the challenges in other domains where opening oneself to new experiences or beliefs could fundamentally alter one's identity and values, sometimes in ways that are difficult to anticipate or control.

PHILANTHROPY AND PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE

Effectively doing good in the world often involves navigating a disconnect between emotionalSalience and rational impact. People tend to be moved by immediate, concrete suffering (like a single child in peril) rather than vast, abstract statistics of distant crises. This emotional bias means that causes with the greatest rational claim to resources might not engage our altruistic impulses. This psychological distance, similar to our relationship with future selves, creates a tension between maximizing good and personal motivation for doing so.

RELATIONSHIP WITH PAST AND FUTURE SELVES

Our perception of and connection to our future selves is often distorted by psychological distance, mirroring the challenges in evaluating distant philanthropic actions. We tend to discount the future well-being of our future selves, similar to how we might disregard the suffering of people in faraway lands. This temporal discounting affects our decisions regarding health, finances, and happiness, as the future self feels remote and less real than the present one, leading to potentially suboptimal choices.

THE ARBITRARINESS OF TIME AND EXPERIENCE

Philosophical thought experiments, like Derek Parfit's hospital scenario, highlight the seemingly arbitrary way humans value future experiences over past ones, even if the past experience was worse. This asymmetry in valuing subjective experience is a key aspect of human psychology. While an objective 'area under the curve' of life might seem a rational metric, our lived experience is temporally bound, prioritizing present anticipation and a fixed past, which influences our choices and perception of what constitutes a good life.

GROWTH FROM ADVERSITY AND THE SELF'S FORMATION

Painful experiences, though difficult, can be transformative in a way that ultimately leads to personal growth and a reorientation of values. However, this does not mean such experiences are objectively 'good' or should be sought out. A person may rationally value their current self and reject the possibility of a painful transformative experience that would create a different, albeit potentially strong, future self. This underscores the subjective nature of self-valuation and the impossibility of an objective "right" choice between different potential selves.

DELIBERATELY CHANGING VALUES

The prospect of deliberately changing one's values, perhaps through future neuroscientific advancements, presents a deep philosophical quandary. Such changes would alter the very basis of judgment, meaning the decision to alter values would be made by a self whose criteria for goodness might soon be obsolete. This intrinsic circularity in valuing change is central to the nature of transformative experiences and highlights the profound implications of altering the fundamental architecture of our moral and personal frameworks.

Mentioned in This Episode

●Organizations

●Books

●People Referenced

Common Questions

A transformative experience is defined by two key aspects: you cannot know its essential details beforehand, and it fundamentally changes you, destroying a part of your current self and recreating a new one.

Topics

Neuroscience & the Brain Mindset & Self-Improvement Philosophy Of Mind Decision Theory Personal Identity Future Bias

Mentioned in this video

People

Tim Maudlin

A philosopher referenced as having had a previous conversation with Sam Harris on related metaphysical topics.

David Lewis

A philosopher from whom L.A. Paul received her PhD and whose work in metaphysics, particularly causation, influenced her early career.

Adam Smith

Economist whose observations on human empathy and disproportionate concern for personal suffering over large-scale tragedies are cited.

Sam Harris

Host of the Making Sense podcast, he engages L.A. Paul in a discussion about her work on transformative experiences and related philosophical concepts.

L.A. Paul

Professor of philosophy and cognitive science at Yale University, author of 'Transformative Experience'. Her research interests include metaphysics, decision theory, and the nature of the self.

Paul Bloom

Author and psychologist whose work on affective versus cognitive empathy is mentioned as relevant to the discussion on bias.

Derek Parfit

Philosopher whose thought experiment on future bias and the rationality of caring about past versus future experiences is discussed.

Organizations

Yale University

L.A. Paul's academic affiliation, where she holds professorships in philosophy and cognitive science.

Books

Transformative Experience

L.A. Paul's recent book, which is the central focus of the conversation. It explores how certain experiences fundamentally change the self and our understanding of the world.

Ulysses

Referenced in the context of the story of Ulysses and the sirens, used as an analogy for controlling one's exposure to potentially transformative or corrupting influences.