jstan
climber
|
|
|
Dec 18, 2012 - 07:05pm PT
|
www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Cnj8MIQ0HY
Lawrence Krauss describes a conversation with Freeman Dyson on the subject of consciousness.
Limits on the subject as seen by two physicists.
|
|
TomCochrane
Trad climber
Santa Cruz Mountains and Monterey Bay
|
|
|
Dec 18, 2012 - 10:18pm PT
|
the sciences are certainly a powerful discipline for improving our understanding
however there are problems
it is very difficult to observe objectively, as we are intimately related to the reality that we attempt to observe
the questions we ask do a lot to determine the answers we can get
our limited understanding of reality makes it very difficult to ask questions objectively
and we have a very strong tendency to fill in the blanks with our imaginations when we don't know or understand how things work
working in the woods as a tracker requires a strict state of mind restricting this tendency until the reality of the track proves out the truth of what the animal did
when we impose incorrect suppositions upon the reality being observed, we may get the answers we expect through having influenced that reality with those suppositions
this is my major disagreement with the sciences dealing with behavior and psychology, bu also affects even the most objective sciences
i spent quite a lot of time in basement labs at CalTech with Jack Griffith, who was the first to actually photograph the double double helix of DNA using electron microscope techniques
the process involved taking relatively large cells from planaria raised in a bunch of old re-purposed coke machines and freeze drying the cells in liquid nitrogen and then flash silvering them in a vacuum flask so that you could see the molecular shape of the DNA string with an electron microscope
it took a lot of failed attempts to get it to work
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/cen-v047n011.p010a
i pointed out to him how extensively he was modifying the reality in order to observe it, and he certainly agreed and later made a comment in Time Magazine that his work was less like science and more like witchcraft
my interest in mind/brain/intelligence also led me to spend quite a bit of time in laboratories at UCSF and CalTech looking at brain cell activities and trying to map them to biological and mental functions
again the level of intrusion was so great as to call into question any observed results, i.e. implanting electrodes in the brain
i actually wrote a paper on the subject at one point, relating brain cell activity to computer functionality and music synthesis
much of my professional career has involved using virtual worlds technologies to model what we think we know about complex systems...in order to impose a discipline and honesty upon what we think we know about them and restricting the ability to fudge across the gaps where we don't know...
so we have been having lots of fun with this stuff...but how much are we learning vs how much are we creating the reality that we are supposedly observing?
|
|
MH2
climber
|
|
|
Dec 19, 2012 - 08:59am PT
|
how much are we learning vs how much are we creating the reality that we are supposedly observing?
'Reality' is an inclusive term. Would it be the same question if you asked, "How much are we learning vs how much are we creating what we observe?"
Reality would seem to include things we observe daily, things we observe rarely, and things we may never observe at all. However, reality also includes the thoughts of all the people on earth and mental activity in animals. In this region of reality we at least have the opportunity to create some of what we observe, I hope. Or is that just my imagination?
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
-A race of corn eaters
|
|
|
Dec 19, 2012 - 10:03am PT
|
What a chimera then is man! What a novelty, what a monster, what a chaos, what a contradiction, what a prodigy! Judge of all things, feeble earthworm, repository of truth, sewer of uncertainty and error, the glory and the scum of the universe. —Blaise Pascal
|
|
MikeL
climber
SANTA CLARA, CA
|
|
|
Dec 19, 2012 - 10:11am PT
|
. . . to MH2's thought:
What you're learning is what you are creating.
There's no "versus." It's all there is anywhere. You're creating all of it.
One cannot disentangle observation from data. Name a datum that does not entail observation (the 5 senses). Put a "5" in chalk on a blackboard. That's an observed datum that most likely brings with it plenty of context that's socially defined. (What does the "experiment" show?) Pure mathematics might seem like it can be observed without distortion, but I doubt it. We are not machines; we have values and intentions. (See Mats Alvesson and Kaj Skoldberg's "Reflexive Methodology, New Vistas for Qualitative Research", 2000, London: Sage.)
Here's a summary of some of the problems with teasing out observation and intrusion from data from Alvesson's and Skoldberg's first few chapters. (This text comes from a review of the book taken from Administrative Science Quarterly.)
Alvesson and Skoldberg position their project in the context of some well-known controversies about empirical or theoretical orientation, about pure or socially constructed data, about the relation between reality and text, and about the detached or involved position of "the author." They avoid the obbligato third way between such dichotomies by sketching a framework for reflective research in four levels. The first level of reflective research is to be found in how the researcher interacts with empirical material and constructs the data. The next level concerns the researcher's interpretation and search for underlying meanings, while the third level is about critical interpretation of the political and ideological aspects of research. The last level entails the self-critical and linguistic reflection of the researcher. . . . Chapter 2 takes up empirically oriented qualitative research methods and techniques, focusing on grounded theory, and also includes ethnomethodology and inductive ethnography. Chapter 3 discusses the interpretations of several strands of hermeneutics, distinguishing between objectivist and alethic hermeneutics. The political and ideological conditions of research, which are a central point in critical theory, are questioned in Chapter 4. . . . A fifth chapter deals with poststructuralist and postmodern ways of looking at language, text production, theory and the authority of research. The sixth chapter . . . deals with three additional orientations. . . language, gender and power . . . .
(I think it should be added that there is no such thing as purely quantitative research.)
Now, if you can find a body-mind organism ("researcher") that does not have intentions or values, then you'd have something VERY Interesting. But then, of course, that mind-body organism wouldn't have much of a basis to care about anything.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Dec 19, 2012 - 02:01pm PT
|
Samsara, the eternal cycle of life.
The so called scientists should study .....
If they don't then they only rubber stamp themselves as scientists and are not scientists.
|
|
Donald Thompson
Trad climber
Los Angeles,CA
|
|
|
Dec 19, 2012 - 02:10pm PT
|
Samsung, makes decent electronics,
Merry Christmas
Mr. Von Braun
What a chimera then is man! What a novelty, what a monster, what a chaos, what a contradiction, what a prodigy! Judge of all things, feeble earthworm, repository of truth, sewer of uncertainty and error, the glory and the scum of the universe.
And also capable of some really damn fancy two step German polka moves.
Merry Christmas Mr. Fructose
Werner goes deep and Duhnold stays shallow
Merry Christmas Mr. Au Naturel
|
|
nature
climber
Boulder, CO
|
|
|
Dec 19, 2012 - 02:12pm PT
|
Werner goes deep and Duhnold stays shallow.
nothing to see here...
|
|
jogill
climber
Colorado
|
|
|
Dec 19, 2012 - 03:09pm PT
|
Pure mathematics might seem like it can be observed without distortion, but I doubt it
You do pose interesting and unusual questions, MikeL.
;>/
|
|
cintune
climber
The Utility Muffin Research Kitchen
|
|
|
Dec 19, 2012 - 05:40pm PT
|
Funny is funny. And to all a good night.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Dec 19, 2012 - 06:11pm PT
|
Jesus Christ, Easter bunny, tooth fairy, Santa Claus are all real.
Only nerd lab coats can't see them because their brains are filled with way to much sterile data and stupid so called made up facts in their sterile brains ......
|
|
MH2
climber
|
|
|
Dec 19, 2012 - 06:56pm PT
|
Chapter 3 discusses the interpretations of several strands of hermeneutics, distinguishing between objectivist and alethic hermeneutics. The political and ideological conditions of research,
Your investigator can have all kinds of intentions, values, politics, and unresolved anguish about death personal and cosmic, but those won't affect whether objects of differing mass accelerate at the same or different rates in a gravitational field. When you try to study how people behave, though, you could well be wasting time and money. I don't trust studies done on rats, either.
edit:
Of course studies of people can be valuable; they just depend a lot more on the investigator being trustworthy.
jstan, those are limits on consciousness we won't need to worry about for a while. But I will be sure to enjoy my moment in the sun next time I see it, probably about 2 months from now.
|
|
BASE104
Social climber
An Oil Field
|
|
|
Dec 19, 2012 - 07:12pm PT
|
That is one of the dead from Noah's flood.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Dec 19, 2012 - 07:44pm PT
|
MikeL, what [extremely] little I recall, my understanding was that reflexivity in general was more germane to social sciences and qualitative research as opposed to the physical sciences and quantitative research. Wasn't that the whole Margaret Mead thing?
|
|
jogill
climber
Colorado
|
|
|
Dec 19, 2012 - 09:02pm PT
|
"Pure mathematics might seem like it can be observed without distortion, but I doubt it. "
it would be interesting for you to expand on your doubt... why didn't you?
We wait, eager for enlightenment.
;>)
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
|
Dec 19, 2012 - 11:12pm PT
|
ED, HappyHanukkah!
what is it about people that assures you they are different from machines?
REALLY?? cOME On?
i'd rather revert back to plants being machine-like. i'm still confused as
to what scientist call "life' inside an Oak tree?
|
|
TomCochrane
Trad climber
Santa Cruz Mountains and Monterey Bay
|
|
|
Dec 19, 2012 - 11:57pm PT
|
WBraun
Dec 19, 2012 - 06:11pm PT
Jesus Christ, Easter bunny, tooth fairy, Santa Claus are all real.
Only nerd lab coats can't see them because their brains are filled with way to much sterile data and stupid so called made up facts in their sterile brains ......
i can't attest to any of that...
but i have personally observed that Werner Braun is for real!
|
|
MikeL
climber
SANTA CLARA, CA
|
|
|
Dec 20, 2012 - 07:40am PT
|
All good questions for me, but I have to run to a meeting, . . . so quickly:
Your investigator can have all kinds of intentions, values, politics, and unresolved anguish about death personal and cosmic, but those won't affect whether objects of differing mass accelerate at the same or different rates in a gravitational field.
Think about it, MH2. Why study any of those things at all? Is it possible to come up with a perfectly neutral answer?
If not, then you're involved as an observer in the observations.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!