Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Aug 28, 2017 - 08:19am PT
|
"What Ed means to say is that CONSCIOUSNESS evolves and ripens as the brain adapts and learns etc. That much we can agree on,..."
wow, agreement.
'Lastly, Ed posits awareness as a "behavior," which issues from a thing, the thing being, for Ed, the chunk of brain that mechanically "sources" awareness. This is a kind of updated behaviorialism, now mercifully junked for logical incoherence.'
hmmm, "logical incoherence," what do you mean by this phrase? it has a precise philosophical meaning, but I am not sure if you are aware of it
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/truth-coherence/
So perhaps you could be more informative by using simpler language that would convey your point in a straight forward way.
Oh, and that "behaviorism" (I think this is what you meant) thing...
A Game You Can Control With Your Mind
'The algorithms learn from your behavior. Before playing the game, you train them to recognize when you are focusing your attention on an object. A pulse of light bounces around the virtual room, and each time it hits a small colored ball in front of you, you think about the ball. At that moment, when you focus on the light and it stimulates your brain, the system reads the electrical spikes of your brain activity.
After you do this for a few minutes, the game learns to recognize when you are concentrating on an item. “We look at specific brain signals,” Mr. Alcaide said, “and once we understand them, we can use them.”'
...seems to be coming to a computer game near you soon.
Largo, I thought you said this was philosophically impossible.
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
|
Aug 28, 2017 - 02:26pm PT
|
Sometimes I think that JL is a bit cavalier with terms and expressions from philosophy as he is with physics and math concepts. For instance, the "known as . . ." Dennett's Folly.
It's virtually impossible to arrive at any sort of consensus concerning definitions on this thread. And as a result, as the old saying from CS goes: garbage in -> garbage out.
|
|
eeyonkee
Trad climber
Golden, CO
|
|
|
Aug 28, 2017 - 04:45pm PT
|
The latest The Atlantic, has a compelling article -- Conspiracy Theories, Fake News, Magical Thinking. How America Went Haywire, by Kurt Anderson. I would highly recommend reading it. Of the various posters on this thread, MikeL seems to fit the mindset that Mr. Anderson is railing against -- that mindset that goes something like, "anything goes dude".
|
|
Dingus McGee
Social climber
Where Safety trumps Leaving No Trace
|
|
|
Aug 28, 2017 - 04:59pm PT
|
jgill,
"known as . . ." Dennett's Folly.
Googling Dennett's Folly only produces reference to SuperTopo and likely this is a derogatory wording Largo has drummed up to down size the worth of his opponent's ideas. When this action is the substance of Largo's arguments we can likely conclude he knows no way to explain how his opponent's views are wrong.
I would like to know what mechanical means as told by Largo.
Largo's bottom line is The brain cannot source [conscious?] awareness [by mechanical means?].
When you hold a view of awareness like Largo does maybe there is no brain that could do such a process -- magic??
|
|
okay, whatever
climber
|
|
|
Aug 28, 2017 - 05:07pm PT
|
https://www.ted.com/talks/dan_dennett_on_our_consciousness And let us march forward in argument about this topic! Not that we are likely to come to an answer that all can agree on. But I did read the Atlantic article that Greg mentioned, and think it is worth reading by anyone interested in this sort of thinking....
|
|
Dingus McGee
Social climber
Where Safety trumps Leaving No Trace
|
|
|
Aug 28, 2017 - 05:12pm PT
|
To make it short:
Dan Dennett argues that human consciousness and free will are the result of physical processes.
If this is his folly we have some on his side at ST. And no agreement
|
|
okay, whatever
climber
|
|
|
Aug 28, 2017 - 05:21pm PT
|
I'm very sure that it is all physical, electrical, neurochemical, and so on. And that in no way detracts from the miracle of it... that we're able to do all the things we do, including arguing on-line! And Dingus, just as a personal aside, we met many years ago, in the late 1970's, in Boulder, I believe. I was a housemate of Coral Bowman, Chris Peisker, Scott Woodruff, and Dan Hare, and unless I'm hallucinating, you visited for a bit, with a woman ("Last Pioneer Woman"... is that right?) who I have a mental image of... short hair, maybe 5'8", but whose name I can't remember. I think you had just put out your first Devil's Tower guide at that time? And oddly, I do remember your real name, though I won't reveal it here....
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Aug 28, 2017 - 05:39pm PT
|
I'm very sure that it is all physical, electrical, neurochemical, and so on
And I'm 100% sure it is NOT all physical, electrical, neurochemical, actually I go as far as saying it is an absolute fact it is not all physical, electrical, neurochemical.
The missing link is the soul, atma (the living entity itself) which is anti matter and is spiritual.
The soul in humans resides within the material heart.
The modern scientist can not see the soul with their material instruments because the soul is NOT material.
But the fact that consciousness pervades over the entire material body is because of the soul's existence within that soul the body.
When the soul leaves the material body the light from the body and eyes leaves.
Even the gross materialists can see that.
There is a radical change in the body when the living entity leaves its material body .....
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Aug 28, 2017 - 06:05pm PT
|
I don't believe so stop saying I believe.
I know it's that way from experience not from some blind belief that everyone always projects.
You can call it bullsh!t as so many already do or whatever you want and it will not change anything.
Do some serious open minded research, it may take one many many years or lifetimes.
Many in this lifetime will never come to an understanding of this knowledge and is to be expected.
I seriously do NOT expect the gross materialists to understand as they fixed up in material only science.
|
|
Dingus McGee
Social climber
Where Safety trumps Leaving No Trace
|
|
|
Aug 28, 2017 - 06:22pm PT
|
okay whatever,
And Dingus, just as a personal aside, we met many years ago, in the late 1970's, in Boulder, I believe. I was a housemate of Coral Bowman, Chris Peisker, Scott Woodruff, and Dan Hare, and unless I'm hallucinating, you visited for a bit, with a woman ("Last Pioneer Woman"... is that right?) who I have a mental image of... short hair, maybe 5'8", but whose name I can't remember. I think you had just put out your first Devil's Tower guide at that time? And oddly, I do remember your real name, though I won't reveal it here....
You memory concurs with mine. You are taller than most of those roommates you mention?
|
|
okay, whatever
climber
|
|
|
Aug 28, 2017 - 06:26pm PT
|
Werner, I think you should have addressed Dingus Milktoast's question earnestly, not with cynicism and dismissal. He was clearly making an attempt to fathom what is going on in your hallucinogenic mind. But you don't seem to be able to address other people with logic or respect... you're just a put-down artist.
|
|
Bob D'A
Trad climber
Taos, NM
|
|
|
Aug 28, 2017 - 06:30pm PT
|
"I know it's that way from experience not from some blind belief that everyone always projects.'
Your brain/mind experience it...carry on.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Aug 28, 2017 - 06:31pm PT
|
No ... the soul experiences it thru the mind/brain.
You should find the "Your" in your above statement.
|
|
okay, whatever
climber
|
|
|
Aug 28, 2017 - 06:41pm PT
|
Dingus McGee... yes, I'm 6 feet tall, which is certainly taller than Coral, who was a mini-mite (incredible climber, as you know, until she severely burned her hands on the rope, stopping herself in a near-death experience with Sue Giller on the Naked Edge in Eldorado). She quit after that, and moved onto other things. Chris lives in Australia, as far as I know. Scott still lives in Boulder, I think, but is retired from NOAA now. I think Dan still lives in Boulder or Longmont, but don't know any of this for sure. There are many current Boulderites on Supertopo who would know their whereabouts. I live in Charlottesville, VA, so I'm not plugged into Boulder anymore, really.
|
|
Dingus McGee
Social climber
Where Safety trumps Leaving No Trace
|
|
|
Aug 29, 2017 - 05:31am PT
|
eyeonkee,
"anything goes dude".
The Atlantic article may give one the idea that we do not have to believe anything but there are still some hard realities and we all know 'em.
Most of us by adulthood of limited resources have some clue of our pocket book size. We also know that we have zero convincing power with say a Toyota dealership to get a new car at 50% MSRP.
But some here may believe they have that convincing power but just wouldn't use it for such delusion.
There still are some immutable boundaries to us even when having the mindset the Atlantic article describes. Same as it ever was, same as it ever was for a life during wartime.
|
|
Dingus McGee
Social climber
Where Safety trumps Leaving No Trace
|
|
|
Aug 29, 2017 - 05:53am PT
|
We cannot get much understable chatter from either the Duck or Largo on the nature of their belief of awareness in relation to the brain. Their talk is simply others have it wrong; we have it right and this is how it is. Their evidence: your views are logically incoherent which is a phrase use challenged by Ed.
Largo, your writing is logically incoherent to speak of one observation. How does that Jungian observation go? Your greatest weakness is what you despise the most in other people.
See this article for another take on the feeling of awareness:
https://selfawarepatterns.com/2016/06/27/damasios-theory-of-consciousness/
This article gets close to the mind/brain interface from the mind['s] modules side of observations.
And what will we get from Largo on this? Nothing with as much depth as the article presents.
Largo reference to this article will simply be called Damasio's Dream and he will call it a "howler" along with a bunch of incoherent writing.
|
|
Bob D'A
Trad climber
Taos, NM
|
|
|
Aug 29, 2017 - 07:21am PT
|
"Why do you know what you know? Not what you know, but why you know it? "
He has no answer that makes any sense, he will just babble on about gross materialists, throw a few insults out and tell us we are all empty and such. That is all he has.
|
|
MikeL
Social climber
Southern Arizona
|
|
|
Aug 29, 2017 - 07:50am PT
|
At Cisco Systems, we used to say we ate our own dog food.
If you’re going to complain about unrestrained interpretations, then you should be arguing for keen data collection and data analysis. The writing in Anderson’s Atlantic article is almost nothing but unrestrained interpretation—his.
If there is an issue that first requires consideration, it’s people’s wont to speculate without concern or care.
Where are the data in Anderson’s article? One might say that the data are obvious. One might say THAT regarding any interpretation—and therein lies the gravamen, the core issue-at-hand. That’s why, IMO, epistemology has come to the fore as THE philosophical issue that most people want to talk about. “What is a thing, how do you know it’s a thing, and what truly exists?” As I’ve written earlier, whether a thing exists or not is not the real issue—but how a person sees. How a person sees defines what a person sees. Believing is seeing, not the other way around.
Anderson’s writing strikes me similar to what I would see on almost any news channel: value judgments, interpretations, speculations, opinions, dramatic renderings. Almost never (these days) does one observe anyone simply reporting data or hardcore data analysis.
Ditto for Damasio’s work. Damasio says his ideas and conceptualizations are speculations / theories. The biggest complaint about Damasio’s work—academically that is—is that it’s based upon aberrations / outliers. Damasio studies the results of unusual accidents, not normalcy. Would you think that the study of anything should be based upon outliers, problems, errors, or mistakes?
“Anything goes dude” is not ever what I’ve said or written. Your abilities to understand what I’ve (and others, academically) have suggested about the problems with naive realism seems hobbled by a lack of close attention, honesty, or hard-nosed skepticism. First determine what you know without doubt. (It’s a very short list.)
If you’re not confused by what’s going on around you, you don’t know what’s going on. Ambiguity is trumping certainty at every turn.
Be well.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Aug 29, 2017 - 08:18am PT
|
We see it in lay articles about climbing, frequently enough. "They" never seem to get it right.
Because they have no real world experience in it or very limited experience.
Just as with my own personal experience with this subject matter of soul.
40 years worth.
So anything I say will never be satisfactory to the nonexperienced in that field.
Arguments will be the only results such as; "Werner is a deluded fool with no hard data from any instrument except his own deluded mind".
Before I post I already know the stock responses that will be coming.
I post them anyway because even those posts I make are in actually directed at myself also.
I'm never the real creator of any that knowledge .......
|
|
MH2
Boulder climber
Andy Cairns
|
|
|
Aug 29, 2017 - 08:23am PT
|
First determine what you know without doubt. (It’s a very short list.)
And because it is such a short list, if you want to learn more you will need to live with doubt.
There was a time when to express doubt about the existence of the Christian God could get you killed, and if you even proposed ideas which cast doubt on the prevailing doctrine you could get into serious trouble with the Church.
Doubt is not a necessity but can be useful and is not likely to kill you.
Doubt has even grown into an important field of study in mathematics. I wonder whether the Church was aware of and had an opinion on the development of probability and statistics?
http://homepages.wmich.edu/%7Emackey/Teaching/145/probHist.html
Is, "Form is emptiness and emptiness form, exactly," open to doubt?
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!