Farther to Go!

Brain-Based Transformational Solutions

  • Home
  • About
    • Farther to Go!
    • Personal Operating Systems
    • Joycelyn Campbell
    • Testimonials
    • Reading List
  • Blog
  • On the Road
    • Lay of the Land
    • Introductory Workshops
    • Courses
  • Links
    • Member Links (Courses)
    • Member Links
    • Transform the World
    • Imaginarium
    • Newsletter
    • Transformation Toolbox
  • Certification Program
    • Wired that Way Certification
    • What Color Is Change? Certification
    • Art & Science of Transformational Change Certification
    • Certification Facilitation
    • SML Certification
  • Contact

Motivation: The Condensed Version

March 5, 2024 by Joycelyn Campbell Leave a Comment

Rewards can be intrinsic or extrinsic, but there’s no such thing as extrinsic motivation.

I’m more often than not the one attempting to make distinctions when it appears that others are conflating or confusing concepts. But when it comes to motivation, there is no distinction to be made between intrinsic and extrinsic because what motivates you 100% of the time is dopamine, which is generated in your brain based on what you want and like and your interpretations. That’s about as intrinsic as you can get.

That means that you are intrinsically motivated to do every single thing you are currently doing, even if you don’t want to want to do it, or don’t like the outcome of doing (or having done) it, or want to do something entirely different.

If you’re doing something to get someone else’s approval, it’s your brain that desires that approval. If you’re doing something because you feel obligated to do it, it’s your brain that sees meeting obligations—in general or in particular—as desirable. If you’re doing something because it feels good, it’s your brain that generates liking neurochemicals for that activity.

Motivation is a functional process that’s mediated by the brain, which cares about what you’ve trained it to care about regardless of how you’ve trained it or why you’ve trained it. Among the things the brain cares about are things you don’t even want it to care about because you weren’t paying attention when you were training it. But train it you did. And now you are intrinsically motivated to pursue those things. There’s nothing at all complex or mysterious about this process.

Threat or Reward?

What you are training, every day in fact, is your unconscious, which is the part of your brain that makes moment-to-moment choices—all moment-to-moment choices. Those choices are aimed at ensuring your survival. The brain is always asking the question what should I do next? at a speed you can’t hope to comprehend. Any time it encounters a bit of sensory information to process—whether interoceptive (internal) or exteroceptive (external)— the first “sort,” so to speak, is always: threat or reward?

The brain’s interpretation of threat or reward determines whether the action will be to avoid (the potential threat) or approach (the potential reward). To put it in the words of a neuroscientist:

At any point in time, your brain (as well as the brain of any living system) is only ever making one decision: to go toward or to go away from something. —Beau Lotto, Deviate

That is motivation in a nutshell. It may be the most basic fact of life.

Since we can’t directly access the unconscious, we are mostly unaware of its processes and how they impact us. When we ponder what motivates us to take an action, we’re looking for cause-and-effect threads, explanations, or sometimes just a good story, and the left hemisphere (the narrator, as Michael Gazzaniga refers to it) complies. As is the case with almost all of the left hemisphere’s stories, the ones explaining our behavior are necessarily based on incomplete information. But we’re predisposed to believe our own stories and explanations.

If you’re interested in psychologizing or narrating a process that is neurochemical in nature, go for it, but that approach will not assist you if change is what you’re after. Of course, you have beliefs that play a role in determining whether you view something as a threat or as a reward (and the type of threat or reward). Your personality, mental model, and experience insure that your interpretations of the world are specific to you.

Life’s Navigational System

But the fact remains that in the moment of choosing, what motivates you and everyone else is the release of dopamine by your brain. And dopamine is released when your brain expects a reward—which is the answer to the question, what should I do next? Avoid or approach? Should you get yourself out of the way of harm or put yourself in the way of pleasure? You can think of motivation as a navigation system that operates at the unconscious level because if you had to rely on consciousness for your navigational needs, your life would be very, very short.

Since motivation operates at the unconscious level, you are not normally aware of the release of these neurochemicals, which include the wanting neurochemical (dopamine), so-called liking neurochemicals (serotonin, oxytocin, endorphins and other endogenous opioids, and endocannabinoids), and stress neurochemicals (adrenaline, norepinephrine, and cortisol).

Kent Berridge, professor of psychology and neuroscience at the University of Michigan says:

Both wanting and liking can exist without subjective awareness. Conscious experience can distort or blur the underlying reward processes that gave rise to it. Subjective reports may contain false assessments of underlying processes, or even fail at all to register important reward processes. The core processes of liking and wanting that constitute reward are distinct from the subjective report or conscious awareness of those processes.

Disrupting the Status Quo

Since you’re already motivated to do what you’re currently doing, your brain is already releasing dopamine—and more importantly, liking neurochemicals—when you do it. Which means it’s already getting intrinsic rewards. If you want to be doing something other than what you’re doing, you have to train your brain to do something else. As I wrote in this recent issue of lucidwaking, if you want your brain to do something other than what it’s already doing, you need to make it a better offer, which means you need to up the reward ante with an extrinsic reward.

You use extrinsic rewards intentionally to train your brain to become intrinsically motivated to do what you want it to do—meaning take an action in the future that it is not taking now.

As one of my favorite clients said just the other day, “That’s where the power is!”


My perception is that belief in the concept of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation is actually harmful not only to the process of behavior change but to people’s sense of efficacy and agency. So I plan to elaborate on that in a future post.

Filed Under: Brain, Contrivances, Experience, Finding What You Want, Learning, Living, Making Different Choices, Unconscious Tagged With: Avoid or Approach, Dopamine, Intrinsic vs Extrinsic Motivation, Motivation, Rewards

The Reward System Is Functional

February 27, 2024 by Joycelyn Campbell Leave a Comment

Yes, the reward system is functional, which means that it isn’t conceptual or fanciful—or optional. It’s integral to our survival, and it’s even older than we are: it evolved in worms and flies about a billion years ago. It doesn’t care what your or my opinion about rewards is. Having an opinion about the reward system is like having an opinion about whether or not your car should need gas. No matter how deeply committed to your opinion you are, unless you have a battery operated car, it needs gas. If you fail to put gas in the car, it won’t operate. If you fail to utilize your brain’s reward system, on the other hand, it will operate you. It fulfills a non-optional function that’s essential to survival.

One thing that gets in the way of using rewards intentionally and effectively is the mistaken belief that things like rewarding experiences, benefits, or celebrations are the same thing as rewards. They are not.

Rewarding Experiences Are Not Rewards

You undoubtedly have experiences and engage in activities that feel rewarding to you. All that means is that you enjoy them, which is really neither good nor bad. Some of the experiences or activities people enjoy or find rewarding are the very ones they want to eliminate or change. And the reason these behaviors are difficult to eliminate or change is because they are rewarding (smartphone scrolling, eating unhealthy food, binge watching, buying things, snorting cocaine…).

So it’s extremely important to recognize that rewards and rewarding experiences, while related, are not the same thing. They both elicit “liking” neurochemicals in the brain at the time they are experienced. And some rewarding experiences also involve dopamine, the “wanting” neurochemical. In fact it’s the dopamine, rather than the liking neurochemicals that makes altering some existing behaviors so difficult. This is an example of the reward system operating you.

Rewards utilize dopamine intentionally. Dopamine can help develop creative tension, which increases the motivation to take a specific action or series of actions that you want to take in order to get the anticipated reward. It’s a carrot…if carrots motivate you, that is. I can take or leave carrots, but the opportunity to add new music to my digital playlist always motivates me. Dopamine also puts your brain on notice that this particular action or series of actions is important and it should pay attention.

Experiencing an unmediated rewarding activity is passive. Identifying and using a reward to reinforce behavior change is active.

  • Rewarding: providing satisfaction or gratification; enjoyment
  • Reward: an act performed to strengthen approved behavior; reinforcement

You can use rewarding experiences as rewards, but they are not rewards in and of themselves.

Neither Are Benefits

A benefit is something that is advantageous or good. Benefits can be short-term or long-term. They result from actions you take. (Of course, you can also benefit from actions other people take or from fortunate changes in circumstances, but you have no direct control over those things.)

If there were no benefit to you for embarking on a particular course of action (completing a project or goal action plan, changing or starting a habit, or following through on an intention), there would be no point in doing it. Benefits answer the question of why you want to do something. So it’s useful to clearly identify all the benefits that would—or could—accrue if you accomplish what you set out to do.

It seems logical, doesn’t it, that understanding the benefit or beneficial nature of a particular action somehow ought to magically translate into the taking of that action? And yet this isn’t how the brain works. The brain’s reward system is functional, not logical. Benefits are not interpreted by your brain as rewards just because they are good for you. And understanding what benefits may accrue doesn’t have any direct impact on your behavior. Knowing that ordering from the salad side of the lunch menu instead of from the burger side is better for your cholesterol level and maybe your overall health will not make ordering a salad happen. Nor will it turn a salad into a reward or even a rewarding experience.

But you could use a reward to motivate you to order that salad if good health or some aspect of it is a long-term desired outcome.

Celebrations Aren’t Rewards, Either

In behavior-change terms, a celebration is an impromptu acknowledgement, after the fact, of something you’ve accomplished. The difference between a reward and a celebration is in how you use it, not what it is. In order for something to be effective as a reward, you need to crave it. That’s because dopamine is triggered by the expectation of a reward. So in order for you—and your brain—to crave a reward, the reward needs to be (1) something you really enjoy and (2) identified ahead of time.

Celebrations are great! Go ahead and celebrate your successes and accomplishments. But don’t try to substitute celebrations for rewards because they will not help you train your brain to do what you want it to do, which is the point of a reward. If you have trouble identifying suitable rewards, pay attention to how you celebrate and the treats you give yourself. You may be able to use some of those things as rewards.

The Bottom Line

Rewarding experiences and celebrations are enjoyable, and benefits are…beneficial (good for you). But, unlike rewards, they do not serve the function of motivating you to create behavior change. Because the reward system operates at the unconscious level, you can’t simply dismiss it or try to circumvent it. The best course of action is to take advantage of it and work with it. Otherwise, you may unwittingly develop and reinforce behaviors you don’t want. No one sets out to develop undesirable behaviors or habits on purpose. And yet each of us has trained our brain, often unwittingly but via the same process, to engage in every one of the behaviors and habits we now have, both the ones we like and want to keep and the ones we don’t like and want to change or eliminate.


I’m beginning a six-month experiment called Contrivance of the Month. This experiment includes using my newsletter, lucidwaking, to feature an article on the relevant contrivance in one issue and links to worksheets, instructions, and additional information in another issue. The March contrivance, as you may already know or have guessed, is rewards. If you want to play along, you can check out the 2/20/24 issue on the Newsletter page on my website, where you can also subscribe to lucidwaking to keep up with the contrivance content. The next issue with all the links and other good stuff will be published tomorrow, 2/28/24.

Filed Under: Anticipation, Beliefs, Brain, Celebration, Contrivances, Distinctions, Habit Tagged With: Benefits, Brain's Reward System, Dopamine, Liking, Rewards, Wanting

Sudoku, Provisional Assessments,
and the Space of Possibilities

February 6, 2024 by Joycelyn Campbell Leave a Comment

I enjoy working Sudoku puzzles, especially the hard or challenger level, and I always look forward to the super challenger puzzles on the back pages of Dell’s Crazy for Sudoku books that take days to complete. (They look like the puzzle pictured above.)

A friend once said that she’d completed a Sudoku puzzle and, having solved it, did not see a point in doing it again. Certainly completing a puzzle successfully is one point of Sudoku, but for me it’s the incomplete puzzle that’s juicy, especially if I’m struggling with it and not sure I’ll be able to solve it.

Sudoku puzzles are a great example of one of the aspects of existential troublesome knowledge I talked about in the last blog post: what we don’t know exceeds and is more important than what we know. The numbers that are not filled in are more important than the numbers that are filled in. And there’s no way to know at the outset which numbers go in which blank spaces. You can only find out by taking action. As you fill in more numbers, you get more information, and eventually you solve the puzzle. This is a life lesson some of us struggle to learn.

There’s always a point where I feel stuck, at least with some hard or challenger level puzzles. I can’t find a next number to fill in. I used to get frustrated when I was stuck, but after going through this process so many times, I’m quite familiar with it and am no longer frustrated by it. I think Sudoku has trained my brain to recognize that being stuck is a temporary condition and so I actually appreciate the experience now.

I don’t know if or how I will solve the puzzle, but I now appreciate the space of not knowing, of uncertainty, because it’s also the space of possibilities. This is the same space I get into when I’m grappling with a conceptual problem or puzzle. And in both Sudoku and conceptual problem-solving, one is more likely to arrive at a “solution,” by trying different approaches.

If the only puzzles I have available are easy or medium level, I create “rules” to make them at least a little bit more challenging. I would never, for example, start by filling in all the 1s, 5s, or 9s I can fill in because that’s too easy. But in a challenger level puzzle, I would definitely start that way in order to get at least a few spaces filled in.

In Sudoku, there is only one correct solution to the puzzle. The same isn’t necessarily so for conceptual puzzles where my aim is usually to arrive at a provisional assessment rather than a definitive conclusion because in the conceptual world we never have all the information. But I don’t think this difference is particularly significant, and I heartily recommend activities like Sudoku to train the brain to appreciate uncertainty and to sort of force ourselves to recognize how much we don’t know—and how neither condition is either fatal or even undesirable.

Moving around Inside the Space of Possibilities

The fact that what we don’t know is more important than what we know has been a subject of discussion in classes, workshops, and individual meetings. I asked a couple of different groups to consider, write about, and summarize their responses to statements that described different aspects of our lack of knowledge. Here’s what they had to say. (The statements they are responding to are in italics.)

Our predictions about the future are constrained by the present.

When we try to imagine our future, we can only see a small slice of possibility—based on our current mental model.  The same is true about understanding our past—we do so based on who we are in the present.  When we move to a different rock, we see new things and, to some extent, lose sight of what we saw before. —Susie

We are driven to make sense of the world, whether or not the world makes sense.

It never occurred to me that one would not be able to make sense of the world. Why, all one has to do is work hard enough, read, listen, observe, and have the intelligence to integrate all the available information, and understanding will come. Right? I’ve long assumed that the world not making much sense (in many ways) was a failure on my part (I’m obviously not getting it all, nor fast enough) because of course all things must be understandable, given the right type and amount of information/instruction etc. —Lisa

Our brain habitually constructs coherent and compelling stories—tailor-made for each of us—based on the information available and our mental model of the world.

We seem to live in some illusion of reality or a unique reality to each of us that is constantly shifting towards a pre-existing story that the brain has developed.  We aren’t aware of the information that the brain is picking, discarding, ignoring or overlooking until after the fact.  How to consciously participate in this story of our own reality?  If it’s based on the information available to us and on our mental model of the world then it’s necessary to expand both, to become aware of what the brain is choosing to add to the stories. —Imelda

We prioritize cause-and-effect explanations and discount randomness (because we can’t account for it).”

How can we imagine a future without our history? Can I only imagine a future rooted in my past or can I possibly imagine a future untold? To understand that we are not divining our future but to accept that randomness plays a role in a possible eventuality serves up the possibility for change.  —Sammie

Each of us is weaving stories, not uncovering absolute truth. 

There are facts. 2+2=4. Truths are when we try to assign meanings to our perceptions of something that happened. Each of us has our own way of assigning meanings so no truths can be absolute, or shared by everyone. So we might as well weave beautiful stories, or at least useful ones. —Ann

We mistake perception for reality.

My perceptions seem to be more on the trees and not the forest. Actions and thoughts seem to be driven by a false narrative of what I perceive to be true. I can base life itself on little discussion and shoot from the hip decisions made in the small dark damp room on my shoulders, without much input from “me.” —Kelly

Our predictions about the future are constrained by coherence.

The future is way more exciting with those blinders noted. I am not even confined by my imagined trajectory! Why not create? —Adam

Onward

I invite you to consider these statements for yourself, along with the comments prompted by them. Where do they take you?

Asking ourselves what we don’t know in a given situation is useful even if we can’t answer that question just because it’s a reminder that we are always—100% of the time—operating based on limited information. Could there be something we don’t know, the knowing of which would change everything?

Filed Under: Brain, Clarity, Consciousness, Curiosity, Experience, Learning, Mind, Reality, Uncertainty Tagged With: Daniel Kahneman, Puzzles, Space of Possibilities, What We Don't Know

Existential Troublesome Knowledge

January 18, 2024 by Joycelyn Campbell Leave a Comment

There’s troublesome knowledge—and then there’s existential troublesome knowledge.

The concept of troublesome knowledge was developed in academia and has since been applied and utilized in many academic and non-academic areas including scientific exploration, mathematics, politics, finance, history, and even writing.

To refresh, knowledge is troublesome when it:

  • conflicts with preexisting beliefs, especially if those beliefs are deeply held
  • is counterintuitive or seems illogical
  • is complex or difficult to understand
  • is disconcerting
  • requires a (transformational) change in self-perception

Troublesome knowledge within a field of inquiry or endeavor is one thing. But troublesome knowledge about the very nature of how we as humans function and our experience in and of the world—i.e., existential troublesome knowledge—is something else altogether. It’s troublesomeness squared, at the very least.

Many of our most basic assumptions about ourselves…are false. —Leonard Mlodinow, Subliminal

Phenomenal Individualism and Its Implications

The pursuit of existential troublesome knowledge leads us to a number of inescapable conclusions that point in the direction of what has been called phenomenal individualism.

  1. Our experience is not an accurate reflection of reality, which means things are not as they seem.
  2. We cannot fully know or access the experience of any other person or creature.
  3. What we don’t know far exceeds what we know, and no matter how much we learn, this will always be the case; yet we operate as if what we see is all there is (WYSIATI).
  4. Not only is everything everywhere in motion all the time, but everything (including each of us) is a process, and everything is an interpretation.
  5. Rather than being, or resembling, a mechanical system, each of us is a complex adaptive system, physically, mentally, and emotionally.
  6. These factors all constrain our experience of being in the world—and there is no way out of these constraints—but they also create a space of possibilities, including the possibility of creating transformational change.

I believe the fact that our experience is not an accurate reflection of reality is the foundational threshold concept that we must get (incorporate into our mental model) in order to grasp the nature of our existence and experience: our space of possibilities.

You may recall that threshold concepts are likely to be, among other things:

  • Transformative: they lead to a significant shift in perspective that alters our sense of who we are as well as what we see, the way we see it, and how we feel and think about it.
  • Irreversible: they involve crossing a “threshold,” after which our previous understanding is no longer readily accessible.
  • Integrated: they reveal relationships and connections of aspects and ideas that were previously seen as unrelated.
  • Troublesome: they are difficult concepts to grasp and are therefore troublesome (see troublesome knowledge above).
The Space of Possibilities

What you or I make of the characteristics that circumscribe our existence—how we interpret them and work with them—depends on our mental model of the world, which includes our personality and our beliefs.

Do you find the idea that things are not only not as they seem, but never as they seem disturbing, confusing, trivial, or intriguing?

Is the idea that the extent of what we don’t know will always be far greater than the extent of what we know frustrating, obvious, or expansive?

Does knowing that everything you experience is the result of your brain’s interpretation of data that other brains are very likely interpreting differently make you curious or does it feel unnerving or even threatening?

The Thin Slice

It has become clear that our brains sample just a small bit of the surrounding physical world. —David Eagleman, Incognito

Although what Eagleman says is true, and it’s possible to grasp the concept intellectually, it is simply impossible for us to experience. That’s because our brain is continuously assessing and interpreting the data it has access to as if it is all the data there is. How else could it operate?

If we really understand and acknowledge this aspect of reality—that we are always working with limited information we treat as if it is all the information—we must realize that a likely majority of the conclusions and explanations we take for granted are inaccurate, sometimes extremely so. Our brain can’t take into account factors of which it is unaware. Yet there are always factors that affect us of which we and our brain are unaware.

The conclusions and explanations we arrive at daily are often good enough for us to get by—not so erroneous they threaten our survival. But that isn’t always the case. And even if they don’t threaten our survival, they can modify our mental model in ways that lead to maladaptive perceptions of our internal and external world. Taking all of our perceptions for granted can have detrimental effects on our experience and therefore on our actions in and reactions to the world, as well as our wellbeing, and our relationships with others.

We are not significantly different from humans of the past who didn’t believe in the existence of germs or bacteria because they couldn’t see them with the naked eye. Or humans who believed the earth was the center of the solar system. Or that the brain was a useless organ—or that we only use 10% of it. Or that our memories are accurate, and eye-witness accounts are reliable.

When more information was obtained, we modified our understanding of germs and the solar system and the brain and memory and eye-witness accounts. We have enough information now to modify our understanding of how we operate and how our experience is based on our interpretations.

If we don’t, or don’t want to, understand this thing called phenomenal individualism, we will constantly be at the effect of our mistaken beliefs, locked into a perceptual and experiential system within which we have very little room to maneuver and no room at all to create transformational change.

On the other hand, we can step into and take an active role within this space of possibilities.

More to come!

Filed Under: Beliefs, Brain, Clarity, Consciousness, Creating, Curiosity, Experience, Learning, Living, Mind, Perception, Reality, Uncertainty, Unconscious Tagged With: David Eagleman, Existential Troublesome Knowledge, Leonard Mlodinow, Phenomenal Individualism, Space of Possibilities, Threshold Concepts, Troublesome Knowledge

The Scent of Water;
The Smell of Rain

January 11, 2024 by Joycelyn Campbell 2 Comments

Humans are not the only creatures processing numerous streams of sensory data in order to determine what’s out there in the world and what to do about it. Many of the animals and insects we share the planet with are doing the same thing, of course, some with very different capacities from ours: more taste receptors, wider ranges of hearing, and even sensory systems we don’t have. They inhabit the same physical world we do, but their experiences are vastly different from ours because they have different or different-capacity receptors.

What you are able to experience is completely limited by your biology. This differs from the commonsense view that our eyes, ears, and fingers passively receive an objective physical world outside of ourselves. —David Eagleman, Incognito

What You See Is…What You See

When it comes to visual perception, jumping spiders can see a broader spectrum of light, and geckos have vastly superior night vision. The vision of eagles is eight times sharper than human vision, making it possible for them to track prey from a mile away. Cats and dogs see only two colors, but butterflies and rats see ultraviolet and reptiles see infrared light, both of which humans can’t see.

Then there are bats, who in spite of their reputation, are not really blind. They just have very small and very sensitive eyes that operate effectively in extreme darkness. Their vision isn’t as sharp or colorful as human vision because they don’t need that. On the other hand, they have a sense we don’t: echolocation. According to the National Park Service:

[Bats] produce sound waves at frequencies above human hearing, called ultrasound. The sound waves emitted by bats bounce off objects in their environment. Then, the sounds return to the bats’ ears, which are finely tuned to recognize their own unique calls.

Bats use echolocation for hunting, but also for searching and “social calls.” Each species has its own call, and they can change their calls depending on the purpose. You can hear some bat sounds here. Bat calls sound sort of like birds.

The Scent of Water; the Smell of Rain

Most people know that dogs have a stronger sense of smell than humans, but there are claims that the sense of smell of African elephants, who need to drink 70-100 liters of water a day, is even stronger. They have about 2,000 olfactory sensors and five times as many genes for smell and supposedly can detect water sources over 10 miles away. But water is odorless, so what do they actually smell? There hasn’t been much research to date, but results so far suggest elephants might smell the VOCs (volatile organic chemicals) in the water.

As an aside, the smell of rain most of us are familiar with is called petrichor, a term coined by Australian scientists in the 1960s. Petrichor is a combination of water from the rain and ozone, plant oils, and a chemical called geosmin, which results when the first drops of rain interact with airborne bacterial spores. We can detect geosmin at less than 5 parts per trillion, which needless to say is an extremely small amount.

Other creatures that have a superior sense of smell include silvertip grizzly bears, great white sharks, kiwi birds, turkey vultures, and bloodhounds.

Hear, Hear

Moths, bats, elephants, owls, dogs, cats, horses, dolphins, rats, and pigeons all have hearing that exceeds the human capacity of 20 Hz–20 kHz. The greater wax moth can hear frequencies up to 300 kHz, 15 times higher than the highest pitched sounds we can hear.

While a human ear consists of three muscles and the three smallest bones in the body, a cat’s ears are controlled by around three dozen muscles per ear which allows them to rotate their ears 180 degrees. Cats are able to stalk small, fast prey in low light, so they have to be able to hear sounds that are quiet and that have a higher pitch. They can hear sounds almost two octaves higher than humans can detect and an octave higher than dogs. (So should dog whistles really be called cat whistles?)

Our African elephant friends, on the other hand, can hear and communicate via infrasonic sound which is in a lower range (14 Hz to 16 Hz) than humans can detect. The wide-set ears on their large heads funnel in sound waves from the environment

Cookie Monster Kitty

When it comes to taste, pigs and cows have more tastebuds than humans, 15,000 and 25-35,000, respectively, compared to our 10,000. Both pigs and cows are herbivores and the additional tastebuds help them distinguish poisonous from nonpoisonous plants. So all those additional tastebuds definitely aid in their survival. Birds, on the other hand have far fewer tastebuds than humans. Chickens have only around 30.

It’s not just the number of tastebuds that determines how things taste to animals or humans. Cats don’t have tastebuds for sugar because sugar isn’t important for their survival. I did have a cat many years ago who was really into Stella D’oro cookies—the variety pack that you can’t get anymore. The cookies weren’t safe even when they were in a covered container. She once leapt into the air and grabbed one out of my partner’s hand as he was in the process of trying to take a bite of it.

Carnivores, including dogs and cats, have tastebuds at the tips of their tongues that are especially attuned to water. And catfish have their whopping 175,000 tastebuds spread all over their bodies, skin, and fins. They can detect a taste in the water from miles away. They need this ability to help them find food because the murky water where they hunt has such low visibility.

Reach Out and…

While catfish can taste at a distance, manatees can touch at a distance. Instead of tastebuds, a manatee’s body is covered with tactile hairs that allow it to feel objects without coming into contact with them, even if those objects are not nearby.

Seals have such finely tuned whiskers they can track fish that are more than 600 feet away in murky water. The nearly-blind star-nosed mole has a nasal appendage covered in 25,000 sensory receptors (compared to 17,000 in a human hand), as a result of which it is the fastest-foraging mammal in the world.

Sci-Fi Senses

As mentioned previously, some animals have senses humans don’t have, such as echolocation (used by dolphins as well as bats), electroreception (the ability to sense electrical currents or fields, used by aquatic and amphibious animals), or magnetoreception (the ability to perceive the Earth’s magnetic field, used by homing pigeons and pregnant sea turtles).

Our Experience is Not an Accurate Reflection of Reality

Whether an individual has a sensory processing disorder, a sensory enhancement, or better or worse sensing abilities than their fellow humans or other creatures, we all exist in the same physical world that contains the same material processes and properties. We do not, however, experience the world in the same way, which means our experience is not an accurate reflection of reality. We have receptors that provide us with the type and quantity of sensory data that is good enough, that is sufficient to allow us to be us, to experience specific aspects of the world (our umwelt, as biologist Jakob von Uexküll named it) but not others, to maneuver within that world, to mate and continue the species, to survive.

If our sensory capacities were different, our experiences would be different, and we would be different. As a thought experiment, try to imagine what your experience might be and who you might be if, for example:

  • You had the eyesight of an eagle that can identify objects a mile away
  • You had only 30 tastebuds
  • You could detect water a mile away
  • You had the hearing of a cat
  • You could feel objects without coming into contact with them

What would be the benefit or drawback of any of these—or other—altered sensory perceptual capacities? Is there a sensory capacity you, as a human, have that you’d be willing to trade or have modified for the sensory capacity of another creature?

I would definitely not want to have only 30 tastebuds or the hearing of a cat. I’m not too keen on being able to feel objects at a distance, either. That seems invasive and disruptive. I could take or leave detecting water a mile away; I wouldn’t be willing to trade anything to have it. The eyesight of an eagle is appealing, though. I imagine it would create expansiveness, the sense of inhabiting a larger world. I’m not sure I’d be willing to trade anything I already have to get it. I’ll have to do some writing and thinking about it.

Coming up soon: more on the umwelt and a shift from physiological processing to psychological processing.

Filed Under: Brain, Experience, Living, Nature, Perception, Reality, Wired that Way Tagged With: Animal Senses, Sensory Perception, Umwelt

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • …
  • 45
  • Next Page »

Subscribe to Farther to Go!

Enter your email address to receive notifications of new Farther to Go! posts by email.

Search Posts

Recent Posts

  • What Happened to the Blog?
  • No Good Deed Goes Unpunished
  • Always Look on
    the Bright Side of Life
  • The Cosmic Gift & Misery
    Distribution System
  • Should You Practice Gratitude?
  • You Give Truth a Bad Name

Explore

The Farther to Go! Manifesto

Contact Me

joycelyn@farthertogo.com
505-332-8677

  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • Pinterest
  • Twitter
  • Home
  • About
  • Blog
  • On the Road
  • Links
  • Certification Program
  • Contact

Copyright © 2026 · Parallax Pro Theme on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in