RobotOverlord525's recent activity
-
Comment on Former naturalists/materialists, what changed your view? in ~humanities
-
Comment on What games have you been playing, and what's your opinion on them? in ~games
RobotOverlord525 Link ParentYeah, I was hitting my ESC key quite a lot at the beginning. Eventually, the game either wore me down or I found things about it to appreciate more, but it was really hard to play, from a story...Yeah, I was hitting my ESC key quite a lot at the beginning. Eventually, the game either wore me down or I found things about it to appreciate more, but it was really hard to play, from a story standpoint, on the heels of Baldur's Gate 3. I'd like to think it got better!
As for the base building and other resource/friendship management… If the strategic game is less interesting to you (and I suspect the combat tactics are going to be the draw for most players), I would suggest picking up some mods to trivialize those things. There are a lot of good ones on Nexus Mods.
-
Comment on Former naturalists/materialists, what changed your view? in ~humanities
RobotOverlord525 Link ParentWhen psychologists and philosophers refer to "consciousness," they are typically referring to subjective experience—the felt sense of phenomenal awareness that each of us has in observing the...When psychologists and philosophers refer to "consciousness," they are typically referring to subjective experience—the felt sense of phenomenal awareness that each of us has in observing the world and our own minds. This is different from the more broad notion of cognition, which encompasses all of the information processing that occurs in the brain/mind, including unconscious mechanisms.
Cognitive processes like perception, attention, memory, reasoning, and language comprehension can and do operate without conscious awareness to a large degree. For example, when typing fluently, the processes of motor planning, retrieving words from memory, translating concepts into language, and monitoring feedback all emerge from underlying neural operations that are not consciously perceived or controlled in a step-wise fashion. They arise automatically and effortlessly from our subconscious cognitive architecture.
Consciousness then, refers specifically to those cognitive processes and mental states that we subjectively experience from a first-person perspective. The felt qualitative characteristics of seeing a vivid shade of blue, tasting a mouthwatering flavor, or feeling an intense emotion. So while all conscious experiences necessarily involve underlying cognition, not all cognitive activities result in conscious experiences.While the split-brain research provides striking evidence of separate conscious experiences arising from each hemisphere, we must be cautious about overstating the conclusions. The findings compellingly demonstrate that when connectivity between the hemispheres is severed, each can generate its own coherent processing stream capable of driving behavior and cognitive contents detached from the other hemisphere's influence. However, we should avoid prematurely reifying these dissociations as definitive proof of two qualitatively equal yet fragmented "conscious minds" operating within one person. After all, our current methods only allow us to make indirect inferences about conscious experience itself based on observable data—we cannot directly measure or verify the presence of subjective experience in either hemisphere.
-
Comment on Scientists push new paradigm of animal consciousness, saying even insects may be sentient in ~enviro
RobotOverlord525 Link ParentIt seems to me a matter not unlike the heap paradox. And that's assuming consciousness is an emergent property like we traditionally think. The problem is that, until we know concretely what it...It seems to me a matter not unlike the heap paradox.
And that's assuming consciousness is an emergent property like we traditionally think. The problem is that, until we know concretely what it is, it's hard to really begin to say what is and is not conscious.
-
Comment on What games have you been playing, and what's your opinion on them? in ~games
RobotOverlord525 Link ParentSkillup's review is probably a good one to go with if you're curious about whether or not you could enjoy the game. Though he has affection for the characters, he finds them practically...Skillup's review is probably a good one to go with if you're curious about whether or not you could enjoy the game. Though he has affection for the characters, he finds them practically unrecognizable.
You could conceivably skip all the dialogue and get mods to trivialize the out-of-combat experience. The game might well still be a great time for some players.
That said, if you hate superheroes, it might be too much to ignore here. Iron Man plays differently from Captain Marvel plays differently from Spider-Man because of who they are as superhero characters.
-
Comment on Fellow hardline materialists, how do you "enchant" the world? in ~talk
RobotOverlord525 Link ParentSame here. Especially since I turned 40. The chronic health issues I've developed since I turned 37 haven't helped either.Same here. Especially since I turned 40. The chronic health issues I've developed since I turned 37 haven't helped either.
-
Comment on What games have you been playing, and what's your opinion on them? in ~games
RobotOverlord525 Link ParentSame here! Between this and the (tragically overlooked) D&D movie, it really helps me have a good feel for the Forgotten Realms setting. I'm going to be DMing my first campaign when my current one...I think it might also be making me better at regular dnd because I understand the world more.
Same here! Between this and the (tragically overlooked) D&D movie, it really helps me have a good feel for the Forgotten Realms setting. I'm going to be DMing my first campaign when my current one ends (my wife is DMing this one), and I feel much more comfortable with the setting now than I did before I played the game. It also gave me a good feel for the other classes I haven't played yet (I've only played a rogue and a rather short campaign and a paladin in a game we've been playing for about a year).
Wizards of the Coast really screwed the pooch when they didn't cultivate their relationship with Larian. They couldn't ask for better brand ambassadors for D&D than they got with Larian and they just let them go. WotC should have done whatever they could to maintain a consistent relationship with Larian. Because I can't see anyone else making a D&D game of that caliber in the next decade or more. Or just D&D content of that quality in general.
-
Comment on What games have you been playing, and what's your opinion on them? in ~games
RobotOverlord525 LinkJust a few days ago, I beat Marvel's Midnight Suns. My brother got it for me for Christmas so that we could play it simultaneously. (I talk to him a lot on the phone, but I only see him once or...Just a few days ago, I beat Marvel's Midnight Suns. My brother got it for me for Christmas so that we could play it simultaneously. (I talk to him a lot on the phone, but I only see him once or twice a year.)
I was a little skeptical of it, despite good reviews. I thought it was going to be something like Hearthstone but with a Marvel skin. I have absolutely, positively no interest in reliving the TCG/CCG card games of my adolescence. But, fortunately, I was completely wrong about what kind of game this is! You can see Firaxis's past games, particularly XCOM, in the way combat was designed. The cards are just a way to randomize what abilities your characters have access to on any given turn and a way to create different builds for each character. Despite what it might look like in static screenshots, positioning and movement is quite important.
Both my brother and I quite enjoyed the game, and he's not even a superhero fan. (In fact, I would say he is skeptical of superhero content in general.)
There are admittedly definitely some weird things about the game. Like how it occasionally looks very janky, graphics-wise. As if they originally built it at more of an XCOM level and then decided to "zoom in" to the third person perspective they ended up using. The teambuilding and friendship mechanics are also very weird and grindier than they should be, as is the resource gathering. Fortunately, there are plenty of mods available for the game that can eliminate all of that.
But the combat is fun, the story is pretty good (though a bit cheesy and a hard game to follow up Baldur's Gate 3 with), and the voice acting is generally excellent. I heartily recommend it.
Skillup has a good review of it, if anyone's interested in the game, though I disagree with how much he despised the narrative side of the game. Yeah, Firaxis has delivered a rather more juvenile, high school-esque version of a lot of characters, but I didn't find it terrible. Some characters were annoying, and the way they fawn over the player character is irritating, but most of them were generally likable and, again, well acted. Baldur's Gate 3 companions these are not, for sure, though. None of the writing here is on anything close to that level. But I think it's telling that, even though he hated all of the narrative side of the game, Skillup still overall enjoyed it because the combat system is so unique and fun.
-
Comment on What games have you been playing, and what's your opinion on them? in ~games
RobotOverlord525 Link ParentYeah, I got into a habit of quick saving constantly. Perhaps, even excessively. You can never save too often! (Particularly if you are prone to the occasional save scuming.)Yeah, I got into a habit of quick saving constantly. Perhaps, even excessively. You can never save too often! (Particularly if you are prone to the occasional save scuming.)
-
Comment on ‘Star Trek: Strange New Worlds’ renewed for Season 4; ‘Lower Decks’ to conclude with Season 5 in ~tv
RobotOverlord525 Link ParentYeah, I definitely felt like season 2 wasn't as good as season 1. In fact, it reminded me entirely too much of what I don't like about Discovery. I wish they could strike a bit more of a middle...Yeah, I definitely felt like season 2 wasn't as good as season 1. In fact, it reminded me entirely too much of what I don't like about Discovery.
I wish they could strike a bit more of a middle ground between the lavish production values of the modern shows and the longer, deeper seasons of the '90s shows. 8-10 episodes per year just isn't enough to do an ensemble, episodic show justice.
-
Comment on Two years to save the planet, says UN climate chief in ~enviro
RobotOverlord525 Link ParentHuman evolution hardwired our ancestors for survival in an unpredictable world. Immediate threats and opportunities took precedence over distant, uncertain futures. This evolutionary legacy has...Human evolution hardwired our ancestors for survival in an unpredictable world. Immediate threats and opportunities took precedence over distant, uncertain futures. This evolutionary legacy has bequeathed us a psychological "present bias," where the urgency of now overshadows the needs of tomorrow. In the context of climate change, this bias manifests in a global inertia, particularly pronounced in developed nations, where the immediacy of economic growth, political gain, and social comfort often trumps the looming environmental catastrophe.
The social fabric of humanity is woven with threads of in-group favoritism, an evolutionary trait that ensured the survival of our forebears by fostering group cohesion and cooperation. Today, this manifests in a preference for national interests and the welfare of immediate communities over the global collective. Developed nations, with their historical emissions and current consumption patterns, face a moral imperative to lead the charge against climate change. But our in-group bias creates a reluctance to act unless there is perceived equitable effort from all, leading to a deadlock in international climate policy. Worse still, we are more concerned with how are efforts will affect ourselves and our in-groups, not how it will affect others.
Theoretically, governments are institutions that are supposed to overcome our irrational individual preferences in order to promote the general welfare of everyone. But our governments only care about their own citizenry when they are focused on the general welfare of people at all. At the end of the day, with global capitalism being what it is, the focus of the governments of wealthy nations is predominantly upon the wealthiest people within their borders. A senator from Kentucky is not going to win any elections worrying about and passing legislation to mitigate climate change, particularly if it's going to help the people of the future living in the global south.
It's hard to be optimistic about our ability to overcome these challenges.
-
Comment on Discord to start showing ads for gamers to boost revenue in ~tech
RobotOverlord525 Link ParentYeah, I'm failing to think of any features that Discord currently lacks that I would like to see based on how I use it. Everything they seem to be adding is all useless fluff, as far as I'm concerned.Yeah, I'm failing to think of any features that Discord currently lacks that I would like to see based on how I use it. Everything they seem to be adding is all useless fluff, as far as I'm concerned.
-
Comment on Larian Studios won't make Baldur's Gate 3 DLC, expansions, or Baldur's Gate 4 in ~games
RobotOverlord525 Link ParentIt seems like such a no-brainer from the WotC side of things to try to do whatever they can to cultivate an ongoing working relationship with Larian. And yet, here we are. I don't know why it's so...It seems like such a no-brainer from the WotC side of things to try to do whatever they can to cultivate an ongoing working relationship with Larian. And yet, here we are.
I don't know why it's so hard for business types to understand that creative things are not widgets. (Well, that's not entirely true. I suspect there is a specific personality trait that strongly influences why your average MBA can't work well with creatives.)
-
Comment on Apple has kept an illegal monopoly over smartphones in US, Justice Department says in antitrust suit in ~tech
RobotOverlord525 LinkThis lawsuit was discussed in the New York Times' Hard Fork podcast. I thought some of the quotes the DOJ included in the complaint were pretty hilariously damning. It's quite obvious that Apple...This lawsuit was discussed in the New York Times' Hard Fork podcast. I thought some of the quotes the DOJ included in the complaint were pretty hilariously damning. It's quite obvious that Apple saw a major problem with iPhone users being able to easily move over to Android (or Windows phones when that was briefly a thing).
I do have to wonder what the smartphone market would look like if Apple the hardware manufacturer and Apple the software company were two separate companies. Would people buy iPhones with Android on them? Would people buy Samsung Galaxy phones with iOS on them? Or, hell, just to look at the smartwatch market, how many iPhone users bought an Apple Watch because they really thought it was the best watch and how many thought they more or less had to because they owned iPhones?
At the end of the day, I know Apple will probably argue that nobody's buying an iPhone just because of the color of the bubbles of their text messages to other people, but all of it just creates an enormous amount of friction that is intended to lock people into their ecosystem. Because no gigantic corporation wants to compete on merits. They want to lock you in and keep you there. Which is not to say that the Apple ecosystem doesn't have any merits. Obviously it does. But it's also obvious that Apple would prefer not to have to compete on those terms.
-
Comment on Birthrates are plummeting worldwide. Why? in ~life
RobotOverlord525 Link ParentI suspect that needing more farm hands and a sort of retirement plan was also an incentive for subsistence farmers to have children. But I'm just speculating. Especially considering what hard...I suspect that needing more farm hands and a sort of retirement plan was also an incentive for subsistence farmers to have children. But I'm just speculating. Especially considering what hard labor does to the human body.
-
Comment on Birthrates are plummeting worldwide. Why? in ~life
RobotOverlord525 Link ParentThat was true when fertility rates were higher 40+ years ago. So I don't think it's a major factor.That was true when fertility rates were higher 40+ years ago. So I don't think it's a major factor.
-
Comment on Birthrates are plummeting worldwide. Why? in ~life
RobotOverlord525 Link ParentThey talk about that in the episode, too. And how helicopter parenting (though they don't call it that) makes raising children even more demanding, which is yet another reason fertility rates are...They talk about that in the episode, too. And how helicopter parenting (though they don't call it that) makes raising children even more demanding, which is yet another reason fertility rates are down.
-
Comment on Birthrates are plummeting worldwide. Why? in ~life
RobotOverlord525 Link ParentI've read a number of interviews with Dr. Shanna Swan, who emphasizes that man-made chemicals are a leading cause of the decline in sperm count and overall fertility. Her research points to...I've read a number of interviews with Dr. Shanna Swan, who emphasizes that man-made chemicals are a leading cause of the decline in sperm count and overall fertility. Her research points to endocrine disrupting chemicals like BPA and phthalates that are widely used in plastics, linings of food cans, and many other products. These chemicals mimic hormones and can disrupt normal sexual development and function. She wrote a book about it, Count Down, which delves into the topic. (I picked it up from my library and skimmed it.)
I've contacted my members of Congress about the topic but, based on seen responses I got, whoever (or whatever) read my message didn't "file it correctly" so I think it was just a waste of my time.
-
Comment on Birthrates are plummeting worldwide. Why? in ~life
RobotOverlord525 Link ParentWhat's interesting about this perspective to me, and it comes up in the podcast, too, is that as miserable as life under American capitalism can be, is it really worse than, say, subsistence...What's interesting about this perspective to me, and it comes up in the podcast, too, is that as miserable as life under American capitalism can be, is it really worse than, say, subsistence farming in any pre-industrial society? And yet people still had plenty of kids back then.
Of course, some of that was simply down to a lack of family planning options. But still... It's strange and rather sad that we live in a society that is so affluent but so many people feel like it would be a bad decision to bring people into that world. It's a rather damning indictment of our culture, no matter how you look at it.
-
Comment on Birthrates are plummeting worldwide. Why? in ~life
RobotOverlord525 LinkObviously I am a big fan of The New York Times' "The Ezra Klein Show," since I've linked to it before. I thought this episode was especially interesting because of the discussion of the...- Exemplary
Obviously I am a big fan of The New York Times' "The Ezra Klein Show," since I've linked to it before.
I thought this episode was especially interesting because of the discussion of the intersection between birthrates (really, fertility rates) and culture.
Here is the introduction from the episode:
So, for a long time, the population concern we’ve been used to hearing is that we are racing towards too many people too quickly. This was a Malthusian fear in the 18th century that more people would mean more starvation. This was and is the fear of many environmentalists today, that more people means more weight on the planet’s resources, more environmental damage.
But now there’s this other concern that has come to join it, that we are racing towards de-population — too few people too quickly. As countries get richer the world over, fertility rates plummet, plummet quickly. In countries like America, we’re now below replacement rate, the rate at which a population holds steady. You see that in China. You see that in India. In some countries like Japan and South Korea, they’re so far below replacement rate that their population is going to rapidly shrink generation by generation.
If you spend much time on today’s right or among the Silicon Valley VC class, you find the set of fears has become, for them, almost what the climate crisis is for the left. You hear about it constantly. For many, it feels apocalyptic. It is the overarching context in which everything else is playing out.
But even if you don’t quite know how to feel about it, and I don’t always know how to feel about it, it’s also just kind of strange. You wouldn’t necessarily think that societies would have so many fewer children as they become richer. Money makes life easier. Lower child mortality makes the heart rending grief of losing a child less likely. Being better able to provide for your children would maybe make it easier to have more of them. Many people believe a boisterous family is part of the vision of a full life.
But fertility rates, they keep falling and falling. And even in the places where that fall has turned into freefall, where the very fabric of the society is now in question, policy to turn it around is proving completely ineffectual. So, why? We’re going to do two episodes on this, but the first is going to be about the global big picture.
Jennifer Sciubba is a political scientist, a demographer, and the author of the book, “8 Billion and Counting.” I asked her on the show to guide me through what these population numbers actually tell us, what they say in different regions of the world, how they might play out, and what they reveal about what happens to societies as they get richer.
You can listen to this episode of “The Ezra Klein Show” on the NYT Audio app (iOS only, for some dumb reason), Apple, Spotify, Amazon Music, Google, or wherever you get your podcasts. (Sadly, these links don't point directly to the episode, I don't think, but I took it from the Times' website.)
Here is a summary of the episode from Google Gemini.
This episode delves into the global phenomenon of declining fertility rates and its potential ramifications. While economic development, education, and urbanization are generally linked to lower birth rates, the podcast explores a range of social and cultural factors that further influence this trend.
Shifting Priorities and Realities:
- Changing gender roles: Traditional expectations where women shoulder most childcare responsibilities discourage larger families, particularly for career-oriented women. More equitable sharing of childcare between partners could lead to higher fertility rates.
- Intensified parenting: Modern parenting styles emphasize quality time and enrichment activities, which can be time-consuming and expensive. Social media often portrays a stressful side of parenting, potentially deterring some from having more children.
- Individualism vs. Family: The rise of individualism and focus on personal fulfillment may lead some to prioritize careers or smaller families over traditional family structures.
Challenges and Considerations:
- Lack of community support: Dual-income families often lack access to affordable childcare and support systems. This, coupled with fewer opportunities for unsupervised play among children, can make raising a large family more difficult.
- Low-fertility infrastructure: Cities and businesses increasingly cater to preferences of childless adults or small families, creating a feedback loop where having children feels less supported.
- Population aging: Declining fertility rates lead to older populations on average, which can strain social security systems and healthcare resources.
Beyond the Alarm:
The podcast argues against viewing declining fertility rates as apocalyptic. However, it highlights the potential consequences of this trend, including global power shifts and a decline in societal emphasis on supporting families.
Key Takeaway:
Social and cultural factors, including gender roles, parenting styles, and societal values, significantly influence fertility decisions. Policymakers seeking to address declining birth rates should consider these factors to develop policies that support families and create a more balanced environment for individuals and families to thrive.
Personally, I only have one child. And since she's in high school, I certainly don't plan on having another. When I was growing up, I always expect to have two kids (a boy and a girl, of course). I have a brother and a sister, and am especially close with my brother, so I definitely see the value of having siblings. But the reality was that my daughter was born when my wife and I were still in college, so we were rather financially strapped. More than anything, I would say that money was the thing that held us back from having more children. But who knows?
There were a lot of interesting things in the episode, so I don't want to just wholesale quote the entire transcript, but I thought this was especially interesting.
Japan and South Korea come up a few times as examples of societies where women in particular seem to have opted out from having families because of the gender inequalities.
JENNIFER SCIUBBA: [...] > Now, the extremes can tell us a little bit here. Throughout East Asia, which has a region with the lowest total fertility rate in the world, there is something in common. And I first learned of it when I was still an undergraduate, I think. And I actually think this is probably part of what set me into wanting to study this for the rest of my life. I studied Japan, and I remember trying to write this paper — this sounds so funny now. I think it was called like “Sex in Japan” was like my senior thesis.
And I remember learning about Japanese young women were basically being — they were being vilified, really, in the media for living this very individualistic life, rather than getting married to a man, settling down and having children. And I think now that I’ve matured in my scholarship and studied more about this, that was symbolic of an opting out.
And we see this opting out kind of running throughout East Asia. South Korea has something called the four no’s — no dating, no sex with men, no marriage, no childbirth. And so we see them have the lowest fertility rate in the world. It’s this idea that marriage is no longer required to have a good life. You can have a job. You can make money on your own. And in fact, it is not only no longer required, it might actually stifle your life because of gender relations within the household.
South Korea has paternity leave. So, there you go — state policy, right? Oh, you say there’s no maternity and paternity leave. Let’s give you that policy. But men do not take the paternity leave. And that’s the values and cultural norms there. So, those are very important in being this counter or a limit on state policies’ ability to affect change. So, there may be ways — this may be where research needs to go. How do you change culture if you want to through state policy?
On the flipside of that, though, as they discuss later, it's not just unique to these highly developed but very patriarchal societies. I'm almost hesitant to quote this part because there's a much greater context here in their conversation that, absent hearing it, will probably warp someone's understanding of the conversation. But I think it's a very interesting potential topic for discussion, so I wanted to highlight it.
EZRA KLEIN: I think a lot about this particular question because I’m so caught on it. Because on the one hand, I get the all joy, no fun theory here. And I don’t find it to be true exactly. I find there to be a lot of fun in it, but I’m also somebody with a pretty flexible job. I work a lot, but I have a fair amount of control over those hours. And I’m somebody with enough money to fill in some of the gaps that we need to fill in. So, we can go out occasionally, that kind of thing.
And the thing that keeps coming to mind for me is like this collision between two ideas. One is that maybe the way we’re doing it, it’s not that much fun. Maybe the amount of pressure we’re putting on ourselves — is my kid reading early enough, are we spending enough time together, are the weekends enriching enough — my whole weekend is planned around what might be good for my kids. It’s like playground, library, go and get a bagel, right? It’s just, it’s all kids all the time. It’s not my sense that that’s how it’s always been.
And then on the other hand, it’s not also my sense that it was always fun, that maybe it just wasn’t part of the choice structure the way we thought about our lives that everything was about how much fun it would be, how individually enriching it would be. So there is this kind of interesting question of, one, have we made it less fun than it should be? Have we made —
In a way, are we too pro-natal for society in a way that has made us low-fertility societies? Because now what it means to be pro-child is to treat your children so well you can’t imagine having more than two or three of them. And on the other side, that this question of making everything a choice about is it going to be fun for me, I mean, when you look back in human history, that’s always how we thought about things.
JENNIFER SCIUBBA: Yes, and we have some data on this. The one that always strikes me is that a working mother today spends more time with her child than a stay-at-home mom would have a few decades ago. We’re spending more time with our kids on average. So I absolutely think that’s the case. And I do think it matters.
This very indulgent sense that everything should maximize your pleasure, why? Why is that the case? And so, every moment as a parent is not the best in the world, but overall, I don’t know. I’ve not seen a study, like, are you sad you had your kids? I mean, probably somebody has done that. Do you wish you hadn’t had them? It’s very few people.
I don't want people to think that the host and guest are adamant that every person should have children, though, so I guess don't take quotes too much out of the overall context of the conversation.
Indeed. Perhaps I can unpack it a bit.
The cocktail party phenomenon provides an excellent illustration of the separation between cognition and consciousness. It refers to the ability of the auditory system to selectively attend to and process a particular auditory stream (like voices at a cocktail party) amidst a cacophony of other simultaneous sounds and conversations.
At a cognitive level, our auditory perception system is constantly processing and parsing all the incoming auditory information in parallel, separating it into distinct auditory streams based on cues like location, pitch, timbre etc. This complex computational work of auditory scene analysis occurs automatically and outside of conscious awareness.
However, at any given moment, we are only consciously aware of or attentively focused on one specific aspect of the auditory scene—the conversation we are actively listening to and comprehending. The rest of the auditory streams (like background chatter, music, clinking glasses, etc.) are still being cognitively processed at some level, but in a manner that does not reach conscious perception. Something in our heads is parsing what we are "sensing" but not (consciously) perceiving or we wouldn't be able to suddenly become aware that our name had been spoken by someone we weren't paying attention to. In other words, cognition (translating the auditory information into specific concepts in the language centers of our brains) without consciousness.
I may not be doing this particular phenomenon justice. I remember it being quite mind blowing in my "Sensation and Perception" class back in college. And I think it's relevant in discussing the potential differences between cognition and consciousness.
I actually have first-hand experience with this one. When I was younger, around 18 or 19, I had an esophagogastroduodenoscopy performed. I remember being told that, after they administered the anesthetic, that I would lose consciousness. I remember trying to concentrate in order to perceive the moment in which I lost consciousness. Alas, I failed. I woke up sometime later in a hospital bed. However, I was quickly told that I had never actually "fallen asleep," despite what I felt and remembered. Indeed, I was told that, before the procedure had begun, I had repeatedly kept telling the nurses and doctors that I "gagged easily," which sounds entirely plausible.
Upon learning this, I had a full-blown existential crisis. If I couldn't remember any of that, could I really say that it was me who did it? If my consciousness—effectively, my self—could be so easily "suspended," what did that say about the fragility of my existence? It was as if I had died and some other entity had been occupying my body until I came back to life.
One possibility is that the anesthetic simply disrupted memory encoding while my subjective experience continued uninterrupted—my stream of consciousness flowing steadily without forming any recollection. Yet there's also the profoundly unsettling prospect that in those moments, I became a philosophical zombie—an entity exhibiting outwardly normal human behavior but altogether lacking the subjective essence of inner awareness. Although it occurs to me that the first person pronoun may not be appropriate here.