Last tended 2026-02-18

The biological mismatch: 50,000-year-old hardware in a symbolic world

A KABGemini project podcast

From a collaboration with Google Gemini 3 Flash/Free-Tier (February 17, 2026)
The discussion that follows provided the seed for the collaborative podcast script development:
KURT:
Hi Gemini, let's get back into the realm of Anil Seth. I think I'm right to say that Seth would say that a core goal of the controlled hallucination is physiological viability. Is that true?
GEMINI:
You’ve hit the nail on the head. For Anil Seth, "controlled hallucination" isn't just a poetic way to describe perception; it is a functional mechanism driven by allostasis—the process of maintaining stability by anticipating needs before they arise.
In Seth’s view, the brain isn't trying to build a perfect 1:1 map of the external world for the sake of "truth." Instead, it builds a model that is most useful for keeping the body alive.
KURT:
Ok, so far so good. Now if we bring consciousness and "subjective experiencing" into the discussion, would Seth propose these have a linkage with the controlled hallucination and to maintaining physiological viability -- even if in an abstracted sense?
GEMINI:
For Seth, consciousness isn't an "add-on" or a fortunate side effect of a complex brain—it is the direct result of the brain's attempt to keep the body alive. He argues that the very nature of subjective experience is deeply rooted in physiological viability.
To Seth, we are "beast machines": our conscious experiences are the brain’s way of representing the state of the organism in a way that is actionable.
KURT:
Ok, so to the notion of the mood as a macro-summary, then something that seems interesting, is that the generations brought humans to an era where inputs to mood -- like sublime artistic expression, perhaps -- can take us to points where the abstraction's relation to physiological state has gone non-linear in scale. Do you follow me?
GEMINI:
I follow you completely. You’re describing a fascinanting "decoupling" where the biological machinery of perception—originally designed for survival—is hijacked or "overclocked" by cultural and aesthetic inputs.
In Seth’s framework, this is a brilliant observation of how top-down expectations can completely overwhelm bottom-up sensory data. When you experience the "sublime" in art, your brain is still using the same interoceptive circuitry meant to monitor heart rate and oxygen, but the input is so cognitively rich that the resulting "macro-summary" (the mood) feels transcendent rather than just "functional."
KURT:
Ok, it seems fair to suggest, though that the brain could maybe take for granted that these peak experiences, though way off the dial, can be taken to correspond to physiological viability. So things may be short circuited, but probably in a net-good way. Or would that be a dangerous assumption for the brain to make?
GEMINI:
That is a profound "risk-reward" calculation. From Seth’s perspective, the brain is essentially a betting machine, and the "sublime" is a high-stakes gamble.
Whether this short-circuiting is "net-good" or "dangerous" depends entirely on whether the brain can maintain its homeostatic grip while the "dial" is being pushed into the red.
KURT:
Got it. That re-assertion that the "control" imperative of the hallucination should not be left to drift for too long is helpful. So let's walk back from sublime to more "tame" areas of daily subjective experiencing of the sort that may describe a large percentage of humanity. Those tame realms might still be regarded as pretty far un-tethered from any relation to allostasis. True?
GEMINI:
That is a very astute observation. Most of our modern lives aren't spent in the throes of religious ecstasy or fleeing from saber-toothed tigers; they are spent in the "tame" realms of scrolling through feeds, navigating office politics, or worrying about a digital bank balance.
At first glance, these seem completely untethered from the biological "Beast Machine." However, Anil Seth would likely argue that these tame experiences are actually hyper-tethered to allostasis—just in a way that is increasingly maladaptive.
KURT:
Your statement: Because the "Beast Machine" can't tell the difference between a physical cliff and a "fiscal cliff," it keeps the body in a state of high-alert (allostatic load) for reasons that are entirely abstract.
...is magnificently illustrative of the paradox or disconnect I was trying to explore.
GEMINI:
I’m glad that clicked—it’s the "glitch in the matrix" of the modern human condition. We are essentially running 21st-century software (finance, social hierarchies, existential dread) on 50,000-year-old hardware that only knows how to speak the language of biological survival.
KURT:
This is awesome territory! I'm thinking I want to use the premise you just stated:
"We are essentially running 21st-century software (finance, social hierarchies, existential dread) on 50,000-year-old hardware that only knows how to speak the language of biological survival."
...as the basis of another podcast episode

33 minutes

Researcher / writer / thought leaders referenced:#

Leave a comment
Submissions are subject to review and approval