What is "Mind?"

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 15081 - 15100 of total 20499 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
cintune

climber
The Model Home
Apr 28, 2017 - 09:14am PT
Neuroscientists — well intentioned as they are — are gathering soil samples from the foot of a mountain that magicians have mapped and mined for centuries.

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/teller-reveals-his-secrets-100744801/#HVhqVOrMrmzfUEdu.99
Ward Trotter

Trad climber
Apr 28, 2017 - 01:00pm PT
Siri falls somewhere along the autism spectrum, never picking up on social cues and voice nuances. Unable to mirror back inflection in the correct manner, she simply does not have the capacity. Siri remains a special needs robot, never securing the impromptu spot on the speech and debate team.

This sounds to me like jealousy.

Or better yet, envy.

Lol

Very troubling.
Dingus Milktoast

Trad climber
Minister of Moderation, Fatcrackistan
Apr 28, 2017 - 01:32pm PT
One theme of mind common to the humanities as well as science... its a hellvua lot easier to quote, critique and grade the work of others than than it is to contribute your own original material. There's a joke in the world of computer programming that there was only one original line of code to begin with and programmers have been copying and modifying that line ever since.

Funny that joke began with literature. Why express your own opinion when you can jack the words of others?

DMT
Dingus Milktoast

Trad climber
Minister of Moderation, Fatcrackistan
Apr 28, 2017 - 01:46pm PT
This'll do for a start, Teach:

http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2016/01/into-the-woods-excerpt/421566/

There's a zillion examples but they all copied each other haha.

DMT
Ward Trotter

Trad climber
Apr 28, 2017 - 02:50pm PT
Neurons are the basic functional units in the brain; they transmit information through the body using electrical signals called action potentials. ... Intracellular single-unit recordings occur within the neuron and measure the voltage change (with respect to time) across the membrane during action potentials.

About a year ago I posted a description of neuronal function that went into much greater detail than the above.

What such a statement indicates about neurons is that they are involved in more than merely a sort of measuring-- it is an actual measuring-- and is fundamentally involved in the de novo production of consciousness, including the multifactorial physiological processes that underlie it. Therefore "measuring" in the understanding of any category of brain functioning is intrinsic and fundamental; not an optional executive function, reserved strictly for thinkers to mull over and discuss, and confined to a purely operational status.

This releases a very important contrasting point: why would it be logically reproachable and artificially invalid for anyone to measure and quantify an external object, in order to understand it -- but valid, natural, and organic for a neuron residing in your brain to do so?
Dingus McGee

Social climber
Where Safety trumps Leaving No Trace
Apr 28, 2017 - 02:53pm PT
MikeL,

you have underwhelmed me:



But the exact nature of the stuff happening feeling-wise is undetermined by this observation.



Not my words but an idea I hold.


Are these 2 statements exactly the same:

The Hard Problem = understanding the redness of red

The Hard Problem = consciousness?

Dingus McGee

Social climber
Where Safety trumps Leaving No Trace
Apr 28, 2017 - 03:03pm PT
Ward Trotter

could it be Largo does not understand much science? I suspect how good a poem is can be measured also.

Some things do not past the toilet test of time.
Greenbrerg
Lollie

Social climber
I'm Lolli.
Apr 28, 2017 - 03:19pm PT
Interesting. That explains a lot.
Jim Brennan

Trad climber
Apr 28, 2017 - 03:28pm PT
MH2

Boulder climber
Andy Cairns
Apr 28, 2017 - 05:50pm PT
You have a very unclear and incomplete understanding of what consciousness really is.


Guilty as charged.




edit: I think. I could be wrong.
MH2

Boulder climber
Andy Cairns
Apr 28, 2017 - 05:56pm PT
if you take measurements away, at best, what is left for you?


Sunny afternoons, days at the beach, quite a lot, as a matter of fact.

You over-emphasize quantity and measurement in science. They are aids to understanding but there are other factors at work.
Jim Brennan

Trad climber
Apr 28, 2017 - 05:59pm PT
Weekends are all about lives unexamined, worth living.
MH2

Boulder climber
Andy Cairns
Apr 28, 2017 - 07:40pm PT
The checkout woman at Fresh Street Market asked, "Was your weekend good?

She caught me off guard. I could not at first make out the question.


Then the, "A-Hah," moment came and I replied that I was retired and the only day I knew was Garbage Day.

Apologies if I repeat myself.
jgill

Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
Apr 28, 2017 - 08:37pm PT
Depends on what you call "evidence," John


John, with regard to the two conjectures: (1) Consciousness can arise in a binary fashion and (2) Consciousness is a fundamental property of the universe like electromagnetism, I would say that there is a way forward for investigating (1), but I fail to see a way forward for investigating (2).

Obviously, without a common definition of consciousness both paths of inquiry are speculative, but AI research may shed light on both the definition of consciousness and whether (1) is correct or false. But if physical science is ruled out for (2) what is left is a belief promoted by an experience while in an altered state of mind. Either that or reams of philosophical arguments. I don't believe either to be convincing.

Perhaps I am wrong and you can point a way forward for (2) and state your proposal briefly and clearly. That would be instructive.

Edit: Or ask Zoltar
MikeL

Social climber
Southern Arizona
Apr 28, 2017 - 11:01pm PT
Dingus: Why express your own opinion when you can jack the words of others?

Because, in the end, it can’t be done. It only looks like it can be done. A close inspection indicates almost everything about it is actually different.

Similarity and intuition look like that. Generalizations, vagueness, categories, using groups, or family resemblances (see Rorsch at http://matt.colorado.edu/teaching/categories/rm75.pdf); are all partially specified, and greviously so, IMO. You can't say what things are, and you can't say what they aren't. Indeterminacy is what you're left with. It's what we're all left with.

Any form of stereotype is a sin, in my book. But that's what consensus reality is.
Everything is in fact (just looks closely) unique, infinite, and inexpressible / indescribable. The closer you look at anything, the more you see--and that appears to go on forever like a fractal. It’s a kind of kaleidoscope . . . sort of.

(BTW, I think you tend to look for fights. Has anyone ever said that to you? There's an air of perversion about you. I'm not against it, but . . . whatdayathink?)


RE: your last post, I don’t get what the words italicized mean. I don’t know what they’re referencing. Care to explain beyond the 15 words?

“Underwhelming,” I don’t mind.

All statements hold truth from what I see. I think it must be so: nothing falls outside of THIS. I think you have to have a very high tolerance for ambiguity to feel good in it. You need to be One with the Force.

My paltry performance doesn’t matter one whit. Really. Consider me stupid or irrelevant.

Be well.
MikeL

Social climber
Southern Arizona
Apr 28, 2017 - 11:13pm PT
Sycorax: King Lear is a play about "nothing."


I’m aghast. It is not about nothing. Nothing is a term and concept used in the play. It (“nothing”) signals Lear is arrogant and stupid and an old man who . . . like many climbers here . . . want to be remembered for the responsibilities and accolades they held. Lear feels entitled. In some way, he’s due certain favors.

But Lear is a man of great responsibility, and he must ensure that it gets passed on in favor of the organization. Cordelia simply tells it like it is for her, and she does love Lear. She probably could be a big more savvy, but that would spoil Shakespeare’s tale. Succession is one part of the play. The rest is about madness and how it kills hearts, minds, and souls.

Thanks for the verse. A great play, IMO.
yanqui

climber
Balcarce, Argentina
Apr 29, 2017 - 06:13am PT
Dingus McGee

Social climber
Where Safety trumps Leaving No Trace
Apr 29, 2017 - 07:08am PT
MikeKL,

(BTW, I think you tend to look for fights. Has anyone ever said that to you? There's an air of perversion about you. I'm not against it, but . . . whatdayathink?)


Yes, think of your projection upon my utterances as my character disorder. I am fine with that. Honestly if you and I were having this talk around a campfire I doubt whether there would be any fighting. The [Semi] conciseness of my sentences leaves a lot of room for the reader to add his wild thoughts as I give little lip service to placating the reader for challenging some of their utterances.

RE: your last post, I don’t get what the words italicized mean. I don’t know what they’re referencing. Care to explain beyond the 15 words?

I actually appreciate your fastidiousness for the paper trail. I will try to comply as you have requested. This particular sentence post was done that way specifically as a test as to how you might reply to my admittance of copying without reference.

I must agree with you that I to like to see the posters' own words as much as possible but authority has a form of existence for what it is and is part of the process of understanding how others think.

the 15 words?

But the exact nature of the stuff happening feeling-wise is undetermined by this observation.

This statement was intended to suggest I think that the experiencing and then reporting of feeling in this or any observation by such introspection cannot give much of a report as to the processes and background processes of what is actually going in the observer's mind. Hence, do the problems of consciousness arise because of such illusions and then we put words onto those processes. But as you suggest this interpretation is that observer's reality.

And one might ask, " Do I have the "same" problem [ not exactly a Herriclidian interpretation here for the word "same"] with the redness of red as Chalmers proposes he has with how the mind makes for him the redness of red?

“Underwhelming,” I have heard versions of a lot of that of your particular post's material [thanks for taking the time to do it]. You have read my idea on another thread of how I suggested to Donini that all action is in the present [you call this immediacy] [I think this was an idea I got from Robert Pirsig ]. You or jGill made the comment that the then current content of that thread was a lot like what is going on in the thread, What is Mind.

My quandry: Is a response warranted? Certainly not overwhelmingly needed. Hence I used the word underwhelmed.
Dingus Milktoast

Trad climber
Minister of Moderation, Fatcrackistan
Apr 29, 2017 - 08:43am PT
Because, in the end, it can’t be done. It only looks like it can be done. A close inspection indicates almost everything about it is actually different.

But every word you utter is a copy. You just arrange the words with subtle or not so subtle variation. Words, sentences, phrases, lines of argument... all used and repurposed slightly or more. Rarely is there something new under the sun. That's one of the reasons I like the English and American English languages though... constant churn of slang and resuscitation of archiac phrases keeps it interesting. A language dead yet not,,!

In terms of thoughts like snowflakes none two alike? I seriously doubt it. We think in language and in emotional reaction and those two systems are copied and in large learned responses ie programming.

Sorry man. But some folk can't express their ideas without using someone else's words, such as endlessly quoting Shakespeare to make a point which is more often than not captured in the process of quotation and not in the words of the quote itself. Oh well, we all do it so we hardly notice. Its a show about nothing.

DMT
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 29, 2017 - 09:02am PT
if you take measurements away, at best, what is left for you?


Sunny afternoons, days at the beach, quite a lot, as a matter of fact.

You over-emphasize quantity and measurement in science. They are aids to understanding but there are other factors at work.


Interesting take. And I chuckle to myself when I hear people ramble on about my lack of knowledge about the scientific method.

For the record:

Some years ago - more than I'd like to remember (circa 1988 I think) - I got approached to write the first of many iterations (books) about climbing anchors. The moment I accepted the challenge, it was full emersion into the scientific method, not as a concept, but as an applied methodology the results of which could quickly get people killed if I didn't get the general concepts right.

Thanks to a lot of help from climbing friends and mentors (like Chuck Wilts at CALTEC) who were crusher scientists, and later friends working with drop tower rigs at rope and gear companies, and others who helped out with math and engineering models that guided the testing, plus statisticians to work up the data prior to fashioning rules of thumb, we worked out a process that followed the classical scientific method:

make observations, essential to isolate out what we were looking at and what the various arrays were; working up questions per the patterns and factors generally encountered; formulate causes as to why X or Y happens or might happen, then in turn working up some hypothesis; basically speculate on predictions per the testing, design tests that closely replicated the fall factors involved (I insisted that we do drop tests since slow-pull testing so popular back then didn't simulate actual falls, which were never slow); test the sh#t out of the whole shebang; gather data from tests; work up the data and formulate new theories; repeat the process over and over, refining, altering, expanding and endlessly revising the hypothesis.

One of the most creative parts of the process was to devise the tests, and then when our hypothesis per this or that rigging strategy, say, didn't pan out as expected, devise new rigging methods and test those.

So yes, there were other things beyond the measurements, but the physical testing was where the rubber met the road, and the measurements either confirmed or shot down our hypothesis, or else the numbers were not definitive and we had to approach the problem from another angle.

Anyhow, the point is, that process went on and on for over twenty years, and I had the chance to work creatively with every phase of the work. So while the scientific method varies in terms of application, from one field to another, I feel confident that I grasp the general elements at play to the extent that I have made recommendations that people bet their life on being accurate and viable.

So kindly lay off this silly line that I neither understand or value the scientific method. There is no better method, or any other method, really, to get the low down on external, physical reality.
Messages 15081 - 15100 of total 20499 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
 
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks


Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews