What is "Mind?"

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 16761 - 16780 of total 16950 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
WBraun

climber
Aug 11, 2017 - 07:52am PT
The minute the gross materialists try to understand "MU" with their material senses they fail.

"MU" is transcendental to all material qualities but manifests itself thru the material manifestations.

"MU" is not material and the impersonal form.

Still one must get to the personal form to reach complete perfection.

Material logic and reason will not work for understanding "MU".

But!!!! the stubborn foolish (and stoopid) gross materialists will continue their fruitless arguments to unlock "MU" with their self-created limited material instruments by the way of modern science and material logic and reason.

"MU" is beyond the reach of the material realm but easily within the reach of the living entity itself since the living entity is eternally part parcel of "MU" and can never ever be destroyed.

Thus the gross materialists will remain clueless until they acknowledge "MU" thru their real self and not thru the illusionary energies of gross and subtle material energies ...

Dingus Milktoast

Trad climber
Minister of Moderation, Fatcrackistan
Aug 11, 2017 - 08:42am PT
^^^ What's the hurry?

By the way, is Transcending Woo to Moo a sign of Bovinity?

DMT
Wayno

Big Wall climber
Seattle, WA
Aug 11, 2017 - 09:01am PT
No, It's not deep.

Yes, we have no bananas.
healyje

Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
Aug 11, 2017 - 09:37am PT
Wow! The duck just unleashed a veritable tome by his standards. Way to go - elaboration is good.
MH2

Boulder climber
Andy Cairns
Aug 11, 2017 - 11:37am PT
That was my read, MH2. Therein is what discriminations tend to do, no? This is what I’ve been trying to point at. Ditto for Wayno’s comment. There’s no thing to teach.



Does it follow that there is no thing to learn?
MikeL

Social climber
Southern Arizona
Aug 12, 2017 - 07:07am PT
MH2: Does it follow that there is no thing to learn?

As I see it, only if you put the accent grave on “thing” (cf: “amphiboly”). In such instances, “mu” might be a proper answer.

Logisticians would say amphiboly is a problem of grammar, but it also seems to be a problem with the act of categorization. There are many concerns about the use of dichotomies, equivocations, the law of contradiction, and “the excluded middle.” All focus on whether there are things and not-things. These would seem to be fundamental conversations.

Mu” suggests that some ways of using mind creates limitations (maybe all), or that one should be careful not to take what mind provides all too seriously or concretely. Mind may simply be something to play with. Like you seemed to imply above: “curiosity” is a form of play. Perhaps we should be playing all the time with it. There are many ways, no?
MH2

Boulder climber
Andy Cairns
Aug 12, 2017 - 07:35am PT
Perhaps we should be playing all the time with it. There are many ways, no?


Off the top of my mind I can think of at least two: golf and tiddlywinks.
yanqui

climber
Balcarce, Argentina
Aug 12, 2017 - 04:15pm PT
Bovine Guidance at the City is a good climb with a great name. Mu!
jstan

climber
Aug 13, 2017 - 07:05pm PT
Learning in a photonic system.

http://physicstoday.scitation.org/doi/full/10.1063/PT.3.3654
MH2

Boulder climber
Andy Cairns
Aug 13, 2017 - 07:40pm PT
While at the University of Chicago I studied the vestibular system, structures of the inner ear which sense linear and angular accelerations of the head.

During my time there I was surprised to find that airliners had begun using circular laser beams to detect pitch, roll, and yaw.

The phrase, "If you want to do it right, do it with light," came to me.

In checking my memory just now, I was delighted to learn of Georges Sagnac, whose work led to the laser-based inertial navigation devices.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Sagnac
MikeL

Social climber
Southern Arizona
Aug 14, 2017 - 06:05am PT
"What Is Brain?"
Bob D'A

Trad climber
Taos, NM
Aug 14, 2017 - 07:27am PT
"What Is Brain?"




Pretty obvious.
i-b-goB

Social climber
Wise Acres
Aug 14, 2017 - 07:43am PT
Very quietly now, with your eyes closed, try to let go of all the content that generally occupies your consciousness. Think of your mind as a vast circle, surrounded by a layer of heavy, dark clouds. You can see only the clouds because you seem to be standing outside the circle and quite apart from it.

From where you stand, you can see no reason to believe there is a brilliant light hidden by the clouds. The clouds seem to be the only reality. They seem to be all there is to see. Therefore, you do not attempt to go through them and past them, which is the only way in which you would be really convinced of their lack of substance. We will make this attempt today.

After you have thought about the importance of what you are trying to do for yourself and the world, try to settle down in perfect stillness, remembering only how much you want to reach the light in you today,–now! Determine to go past the clouds. Reach out and touch them in your mind. Brush them aside with your hand; feel them resting on your cheeks and forehead and eyelids as you go through them. Go on; clouds cannot stop you.

If you are doing the exercises properly, you will begin to feel a sense of being lifted up and carried ahead. Your little effort and small determination call on the power of the universe to help you, and God Himself will raise you from darkness into light. You are in accord with His Will. You cannot fail because your will is His.

https://www.acim.org/Lessons/lesson.html?lesson=69

...light on! : )
MH2

Boulder climber
Andy Cairns
Aug 14, 2017 - 08:32am PT
"What Is Brain?"



The part of you without which you could not produce the above.

Brain meets, "What is Brain?"
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Aug 14, 2017 - 08:53am PT
The Off-Switch Game
Dylan Hadfield-Menell and Anca Dragan and Pieter Abbeel and Stuart Russell

Abstract
It is clear that one of the primary tools we can use to mitigate the potential risk from a misbehaving AI system is the ability to turn the system off. As the capabilities of AI systems improve, it is important to ensure that such systems do not adopt sub-goals that prevent a human from switching them off. This is a challenge because many formulations of rational agents create strong incentives for self-preservation. This is not caused by a built-in instinct, but because a rational agent will maximize expected utility and cannot achieve whatever objective it has been given if it is dead. Our goal is to study the incentives an agent has to allow itself to be switched off. We analyze a simple game between a human H and a robot R, where H can press R’s off switch but R can disable the off switch. A traditional agent takes its reward function for granted: we show that such agents have an incentive to disable the off switch, except in the special case where H is perfectly rational. Our key insight is that for R to want to preserve its off switch, it needs to be uncertain about the utility associated with the outcome, and to treat H’s actions as important observations about that utility. (R also has no incentive to switch itself off in this setting.) We conclude that giving machines an appropriate level of uncertainty about their objectives leads to safer designs, and we argue that this setting is a useful generalization of the classical AI paradigm of rational agents.

MikeL

Social climber
Southern Arizona
Aug 14, 2017 - 09:54am PT
Pretty obvious.

The part of you without which you could not produce the above.

With all due respect, these strike me as ignorant and stupid responses.

Bob’s is predictable. He doesn’t seem to know anything about the subject.

Andy, your’s is far less so—especially for a person who supposedly has formal training and experience in the topic area. There are many parts of me (as it were) that seemed to be necessary to produce what I wrote above. There’s no reason to list them all here, even if I could. The list seems endless.

For those people who contribute to this thread who continue to argue that mind is simply brain, if one cannot say what brain is, then the question about “what is mind” continues to go unanswered.
Marlow

Sport climber
OSLO
Aug 14, 2017 - 11:58am PT

Dingus Milktoast

Trad climber
Minister of Moderation, Fatcrackistan
Aug 14, 2017 - 12:20pm PT
For those people who contribute to this thread who continue to argue that mind is simply brain, if one cannot say what brain is, then the question about “what is mind” continues to go unanswered.

Circular logic is circular. Btw, if the mind is woo like some of you hold, your statement above cannot be true. It is only true if the mind is part of, or a product of, the brain.

LOL I've noticed a lot of the woo crowd slips back and forth, for convenience, between physical theories and paraphysical whimsy.

DMT
Bob D'A

Trad climber
Taos, NM
Aug 14, 2017 - 03:56pm PT
"Bob’s is predictable. He doesn’t seem to know anything about the subject."



Nice response Mike, getting more like Werner everyday. I just don't buy into your long winded responses.

I was a biology major. There is no proof of what you want to call mind, no matter what bullshit the duck and JL spew out.


The brain in the year 2017 has been pretty well studied and will continue to be studied. Looking forward what the gross materialist come up with.
jonnyrig

climber
Aug 14, 2017 - 04:11pm PT
The most intelligent thing in the universe had best not be us.
Messages 16761 - 16780 of total 16950 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

Review Categories
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews