Brian Appavu, MD

Civilization: Dynamic and Static Societies This was inspired by the book, Lords of the Cosmos: From Stasis to Stars (https://www.amazon.com/-/he/Arjun-Khemani/dp/1544549539) #vlog #philosophy

To others, we're a mystery waiting to be unraveled. When I learn something new about somebody, it doesn't 'change my opinion of them'. Rather, it elucidates a part of the mystery I have in my mind of who they are.

My article on the 'Consciousness of Bitcoin'. It highlights how both bitcoin and consciousness are emergent network phenomena with very similar properties. #philosophy #bitcoin #consciousness #neuroscience #mind #brain #awareness #neurology View Article →

Political Assassinations, The Fourth Turning, and Orienting Yourself Toward Your Best Character #vlog

A lecture-version of my article on the 'Hard Problem of Consciousness'. #philosophy #vlog #readstr #consciousness #neuroscience #brain

My latest article on the 'Hard Problem of Consciousness'. #philosophy #readstr #consciousness #neuroscience #brain View Article →

Whether it's reactions to Charlie Kirk or the recent uproar over the discussion surrounding acetaminophen (Tylenol) and autism, I'm continuing to observe the same thing: We're all looking at the same observations and data, but we're not comprehending each other. On the acetaminophen question, I don’t believe that many of the staunchly committed voices on any side are all that confused about “association vs. causation.” I think there are quite a number of people with drastically different viewpoints who demonstrate some understanding of the limits of observational studies — confounding, mediation, collinearity, and so on. So why do we still continue to talk past each other? I don’t think the Charlie Kirk discourse is really about politics. I don’t think the acetaminophen debate is really about politics or even science. I think the issue is deeper. I think some of it has to do with our emotional processing during discourse, and the language we use when we respond. But part of it also comes down to something even more basic: whether we share the same epistemology — the way we define what counts as knowledge and truth. And here’s the problem: most people don’t even know what the word “epistemology” means. Yet without some shared understanding of it, I don’t see how we’ll ever truly understand each other. #philosophy #politics #knowledge

My video lecture on the Biological Theories of Consciousness #philosophy #brain #mind #psychology #neuroscience #consciousness

My recent article on Biological Theories of Consciousness. View Article →

I found this interview from Ilhan Omar very emotionally provocative. Initially, I felt a lot of anger, but I've heard a lot of terrible things said about Charlie Kirk and I wanted to explore why I found her words so provocative. I think the weight of her words were in saying that his legacy should be "in the dust bin of history". The thing is, if we think someone is wrong or terrible, we take their legacy as important. Not because we agree with them, but because we want to understand their motivations, errors, and not repeat the evils of the past. We understand that it's important to understand Adolf Hitler and his writings in Mein Kampf. We understand that it's important to understand the background and motivations of Osama Bin Laden. So why would someone want someone's ideas and legacy, which are clearly inspiring others, to be forgotten and never heard from again? I think that reason is that to erase ideas entirely is not to defeat them. The only reason to demand they be forgotten is fear—fear that those ideas reveal truths that threaten the illusions that those individuals wish to protect.