The blinders of curiosity, and the predictability of novelty

🌈 Abstract

The article explores the nature of human curiosity, challenging the prevailing view that curiosity is driven solely by a desire for novelty and unpredictability. It argues that curiosity is a more targeted and structured process, driven by specific personal motivations and the need to resolve uncomfortable gaps in one's knowledge.

🙋 Q&A

[01] Curiosity as a Directed Process

1. What are the key issues with the standard theory of curiosity being driven by pure novelty?

• The standard theory assumes that pure novelty and unpredictability should be the most compelling stimuli, but experience shows this is not the case. Textbooks on advanced topics are novel but uninteresting to those who don't understand the basics.
• Algorithms that calculate novelty from information density assume interest is proportional to deviation from expectation, but this fails to explain why tiny changes can stand out while large changes go unnoticed.
• True novelty would be inherently unrecognizable, as it exists outside one's ability to ask questions about it. Curiosity can only be directed towards known things that can be fit into an existing framework of understanding.

2. How does the article characterize the structure of curiosity?

• Curiosity is not a haphazard reaction to novelty, but a determinate act of asking a specific question and absorbing an answer. It reflects an underlying tension searching for a resolution.
• Curiosity is triggered by "uncomfortable novelty" - novelty that undermines what one deems safe or secure, or hints at possible problems. The resolution must fit into a category recognized as satisfactory.
• Curiosity has a negative side - the frustration of not knowing the answer to a specific question. It spurs inquiry until the need is fulfilled.

3. How does the article characterize the diversity of curiosity?

• Curiosity is not monolithic - the scope and content of one's curiosity changes as they mature and understand more about the world.
• Toddlers' curiosity about construction vehicles reflects a power fantasy, while adults' curiosity often reaches for explicit, communicable facts driven by social motives.
• Curiosity and control are on a spectrum - curiosity represents a type of control, the desire to fill in uncomfortable gaps in one's knowledge.

[02] The Limits of Curiosity

1. Why does the article argue that "impartial curiosity" is a fantasy?

• Admitting that all acts of curiosity have personal motivations shaping discoveries shatters the idealized, virtue-laden image of humans as objective, scientifically curious explorers.
• Framing curiosity as a type of control allows better balancing of its pursuit with the need for caution in dangerous situations.

2. How does the article characterize the role of true novelty?

• True novelty comes unannounced and unlooked-for, defying one's wishes, destroying old paradigms, and reconstituting the mind. It imposes itself without consent or inquiry.
• Mundane curiosity and novelty only inform one about the boundaries of their thinking - the answer must still fit an existing model of belief.
• True novelty, in contrast, opens new doors of perception and reshapes one's perspective in an unforeseen way, recalibrating how costs and risks are measured.

3. What is the distinction drawn between mundane curiosity and true curiosity?

• Mundane curiosity is a guardrail that keeps one moving on a pre-set path. True curiosity is the openness to the transformative change brought by true novelty from outside one's existing perspective.