Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Largo
Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Mar 25, 2015 - 04:25pm PT
|
He said: In this case the question is "what is mind?", but I don't think "science" will be able to answer that question.
And he replied: Oh, but it will, Alex. Not long time ago we didn't know what DNA was or how neurons communicated. Now, we are getting ready for AI.
"What is mind" is in fact a totally trick question. A koan, of sorts. Why, because measurements, and running down the details of objective functioning are usually enough to answer the "what" question because there is no meta functioning that is not itself an objective function and ONLY an objective function. Ergo, "what" a rock is, or a rainbow, or a Corvette, can be exhaustively and entirely explained as objective functions. When we encounter subjective realities such as "mind," our discursive minds quite naturally look to a component-based review (measuring parts) to entirely explain what mind "is," but in fact all it can ever hope to do - and do with remarkable accuracy - is to provide us with what mind DOES in terms of objective functioning. Our discursive minds insist that subjectivity is an extension of objectivity, is a kind of material blowback sourced by the brain DOING something. And in this way we can consider mind as a thing - until closer inspection reveals that the thingness of mind, so to speak, only details what the brains does, not what mind IS.
Those who believe that objective functioning will quickly answer the mind question insist that a self-aware AI machine is right around the corner - till it's time to actually write the code for self-awareness, whence they will once and for all understand that the subjective is not the objective, and that the objective cannot be programmed to BE the subjective. The hope is that if the machinery is programmed and wired just so, sentience will naturally and simply emerge once the rig attains a tipping-point level of complexity. This whole shebang always harks back to the core belief that any phenomenon is sourced by some other material, condition, God, magic, etc. Put differently, all phenomenon are things, and all things can be described entirely by way of objective functioning.
Mind is a thorny exception to this belief, for most every attempt here to describe "what" mind is necessarily defaults back to what the brain does. This crazy no-escape (for the discursive mind) circle is what makes "what is mind?" a trick question skirted through purely objective observations, leaving the "what is mind?" question unanswered.
JL
|
|
MH2
Boulder climber
Andy Cairns
|
|
|
Mar 25, 2015 - 07:19pm PT
|
Those who believe that objective functioning will quickly answer the mind question insist that a self-aware AI machine is right around the corner
Who are "those" and are they made of straw?
If you think that "What is Mind?" is a trick question you have fooled yourself.
|
|
Bushman
Social climber
Elk Grove, California
|
|
|
Mar 25, 2015 - 08:03pm PT
|
'The Day that Boson Died'
I was on a brief sabbatical,
In the lovely month of May,
When I shank down to Planck length,
In the quantum realm that day,
I was looking for the God particle,
And found a Lilliputian,
Riding an electron,
To the quantum execution,
He said "Which way are you going?"
And he offered me a ride,
I was almost out of breath,
And much too tired to decline,
They were gathered all about,
There were particles by the score,
There were leptons, quarks, and photons,
And I heard a muon snore,
At the front of the mob,
A gallows was in place,
There standing on a trap door,
With a hood upon his face,
Was some kind of a boson,
Shamed and in disgrace,
Higgs was his name,
I heard somebody say,
Likely an understatement,
Things weren't going his way,
The drum roll began,
On the platform appeared,
An axion particle,
Who read from a scroll,
"Hear ye, hear ye,"
The axion then said,
"The criminal shall be hanged,
By the neck until he's dead,
"For crimes against the state,
And for civil unrest,
If the quantum and the macro,
We're ever rectified,
Then for blasphemy of God,
For that he has been tried,
And that God's been trumped by science,
For that now he must die!"
The drum roll then resumed,
The crowd began to hush,
The perpetrator trembled,
And plummeted to his fate,
At the end of a rope,
Where the physicists lost all hope,
That this savior had the answer,
To a theory yet unproved,
Wether String theory or M theory,
Or the theory of the Loop,
Would for certain go unanswered,
When the particle zoo itself,
Killed the only messenger,
As the theory of everything,
Was placed upon a shelf,
As the crowd slowly dispersed,
And I wandered about,
I heard the Lilliputian,
Hail me with a shout,
"I'm returning back to Largeland,
If you'd care for a ride?"
And I never returned to the quantum,
Since the day that boson died.
-bushman
03/25/2015
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
|
Mar 25, 2015 - 08:10pm PT
|
for most every attempt here to describe "what" mind is necessarily defaults back to what the brain does
Well, I gave all you guys a week to answer these fundamental questions, and I check back and find little or no progress. I guess the "super" in Supertopo is misleading.
I had so hoped the issue of free will had been resolved. But nooooo . . . someone's been napping on the job!
Shape up.
|
|
Bushman
Social climber
Elk Grove, California
|
|
|
Mar 25, 2015 - 09:05pm PT
|
that's my cue...
mind
mīnd/
noun
1.
the element of a person that enables them to be aware of the world and their experiences, to think, and to feel; the faculty of consciousness and thought.
"as the thoughts ran through his mind, he came to a conclusion"
synonyms: brain, intelligence, intellect, intellectual capabilities, brains, brainpower, wits, understanding, reasoning, judgment, sense, head; More
2.
a person's intellect.
"his keen mind"
synonyms: brain, intelligence, intellect, intellectual capabilities, brains, brainpower, wits, understanding, reasoning, judgment, sense, head; informalgray matter, brain cells, smarts
verb
1.
be distressed, annoyed, or worried by.
"I don't mind the rain"
2.
regard as important; feel concern about.
"never mind the metaphysical"
|
|
Bushman
Social climber
Elk Grove, California
|
|
|
Mar 25, 2015 - 09:08pm PT
|
free will
noun
noun: free will; noun: freewill
1.
the power of acting without the constraint of necessity or fate; the ability to act at one's own discretion.
synonyms: self-determination, freedom of choice, autonomy, liberty, independence
"they take for granted their blessed right to free will"
voluntarily, willingly, readily, freely, without reluctance, without compulsion, of one's own accord, of one's own volition, of one's own choosing
"I pursued a modeling career of my own free will"
adjective
adjective: free-will; adjective: free will; adjective: freewill
1.
(especially of a donation) given readily; voluntary.
"free-will offerings"
Translate free will to: Chosing to present mind bending super powers of observable phenomenon such as free soloing El Capitan.
(Free bewilderment)
|
|
Bushman
Social climber
Elk Grove, California
|
|
|
Mar 25, 2015 - 09:49pm PT
|
I'm close to agreeing with Moose. With no power over death free will appears feeble, with 'mind' freeloading along for the ride, 'mind' appears like baggage strapped with a bungee cord to the side of a barrel of free will tumbling off of Niagara Falls.
-bushwilderbeast
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Mar 25, 2015 - 09:58pm PT
|
With no power over death free will appears feeble,
That's because modern material science brainwashed itself and all the fools with it to "believe" they are the body.
Modern science uses stupid reasoning analogy as:
You are the car when you are driving it.
And when it stops working you are dead.
Stupid .....
Also the sub conscious mind is the stored past and can not be changed.
The conscious mind is what can choose.
The drooling moose has it all backwards due to poor fund of knowledge because he ultimately has no clue as the source of consciousness.
The living entity transmigrates from body to body according to the consciousness it develops in its present life.
So to devolve into an animalistic consciousness in this life you will get an animal body in the next life.
Fools will think to devolve into an animal state is wonderful.
The human form is very rare to get but fools all want to become animals .....
|
|
Bushman
Social climber
Elk Grove, California
|
|
|
Mar 25, 2015 - 10:15pm PT
|
Yes. The lovely animals, in human form:
'My Beautiful Death'
My parents meant well in a biblical sense,
When they bore me into this world full of hate,
And for all of my life I will always be grateful,
But into the mayhem they have joined the debate,
They had troubles for certain bequeathing their flaws,
But this dog eat dog world they did not create,
All the corpses of men left defiled and exposed,
From our history's wars so alarming the rate,
Would be better left scattered over the earth,
As a testament to crimes for our pieces of eight,
For mankind in his folly knows no better than to kill,
But if witnessing carnage might carry some weight,
We'd have curbed our primitive slaughtering act,
Having vaporized thousands and not filled the slate,
This simple man that I am with no cause,
And of no other life would I care to negate,
Never tasted nor tempted and nor would I try,
What is homicide simply and putting it straight,
Rarely justified by so unworthy a cause,
As vengeance or profit or defense of state,
I'll not place in the hands of unjust fellow men,
My disease ridden carcass when I meet my fate,
I'll cast off in a vessel not fit for a lake,
Into deep ocean waters and waves that are great,
Sliding under the currents to Davy Jones locker,
To feed the fish let's not equivocate,
For the bloodied hands of mankind will ne'er do,
To lay on nor handle my bones as of late,
Undeserving and sullied and unworthy and rank,
Who knows only of dying only to procreate.
-bushman
03/25/2015
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Mar 26, 2015 - 08:28am PT
|
Try not answering a cell phone.
|
|
cintune
climber
The Utility Muffin Research Kitchen
|
|
|
Mar 26, 2015 - 10:04am PT
|
|
|
feralfae
Boulder climber
in the midst of a metaphysical mystery
|
|
|
Mar 26, 2015 - 01:15pm PT
|
cintune,
LOL, yes probably one of the most overlooked skills among humans is the ability to ask effective questions. I wish I were better at it. I keep learning.
But, I think I might reply to the question, "What is 'Mind'?" (The order of operation for that punctuation may be messed up.) with the following:
I often think of Mind as my ability of self-awareness and ability of self-regulation. Because of this attitude, I think I have ownership and stewardship of my body, but it is not who I am. At least, that seems to be what my Mind believes. At least that is a part of my definition of mind -- perhaps the functional part.
And I imagine that each person here as their own unique, personal, internal definition of 'Mind' to bring to this discussion. Shared lexicons do require some negotiation, I have found.
Thank you.
feralfae
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Mar 26, 2015 - 05:29pm PT
|
Moose,
the only ones who think the issues surrounding "free will" are not resolved are the noobs... in other words, the "weekend" opiners.
Might as well get used to it, I have. The topic is just hard enough that the public confusion is likely to be with us for a long time to come. Esp as each generation gives rise to ever more noobs. Kinda like, Where is the spleen? or Where is Moldova? and of course it brings with it (the completely understandable) overlays... the angst, despair, confusion, denial, ambiguity, etc......
I've been saying it for years... if evolution as a crux is 5.8... then our automated biology (in terms of physics, chemistry, cell biology, physiology, you know the rest...) as a crux is 5.11. Yeah, right, the public's going to be quik to get around that one. /sarc
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Mar 26, 2015 - 07:46pm PT
|
Fact: Consciousness is produced by the brain. It “materializes” after the brain is “turned on”.
Fact: You are as usual completely wrong .....
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Mar 26, 2015 - 08:51pm PT
|
the only ones who think the issues surrounding "free will" are not resolved are the noobs... in other words, the "weekend" opiners.
you're reading comprehension leaves a lot to be desired... perhaps you might re-read the piece in the link I provided up above...
by Galen Strawson
http://www.rep.routledge.com/article/V014
he is not a "weekend opiner""
The facts are clear, and they have been known for a long time. When it comes to the metaphysics of free will, André Gide’s remark is apt: ‘Everything has been said before, but since nobody listens we have to keep going back and beginning all over again.’ It seems that the only freedom that we can have is compatibilist freedom. If – since – that is not enough for ultimate responsibility, we cannot have ultimate responsibility. The only alternative to this conclusion is to appeal to God and mystery – this in order to back up the claim that something that appears to be provably impossible is not only possible but actual. The debate continues; some have thought that philosophy ought to move on. There is little reason to expect that it will do so, as each new generation arises bearing philosophers gripped by the conviction that they can have ultimate responsibility. Would it be a good thing if philosophy did move on, or if we became more clear-headed about the topic of free will than we are? It is hard to say.
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Mar 26, 2015 - 08:56pm PT
|
Sorry, brah, I guess it's not obvious but the ONE subject I've specialized in since I was 25 years old is "freewill" in all its (conceptual) manifestations.
I'll say again: What led me into neuroscience - and 30 years ago now it is - and into the work I do now is this very subject.
In this matter even you are out of your league. Sorry, just gotta call it as I see it.
btw, your post buttresses my stance on the subject. lol!
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Mar 26, 2015 - 08:59pm PT
|
you've spent 25 years thinking about this and you can't come up with a cogent, coherent description of what it is you've been doing and what you've learned?
In spite of the fact it would blow your avatar cover, have you published anything anywhere? and can you reference it?
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Mar 26, 2015 - 09:02pm PT
|
"you've spent 25 years thinking about this and you can't come up with a cogent, coherent description of what it is you've been doing and what you've learned?... In spite of the fact it would blow your avatar cover, have you published anything anywhere? and can you reference it?" - Ed H
Go back to 2010 when I put more due diligence into my posts, I thought I was pretty clear. Start with chemistry and cell biology.
Talk about reading comprehension.
Normally I don't speak n such manner among fellow scientists toward such. But let's keep in mind you started it here.
PS... Read Dawkins Selfish Gene yet? Deign so "low" yet?
.....
You know, it's widely known Carl Sagan got a lot of criticism from his cohorts for trying to bring science to the public in the 60s and 70s, for trying to popularize science before the masses. I could be totally wrong here, and perhaps I am, but your posts (esp regarding scientists who have chosen to write popularly) have always struck me as reflecting just the kind who was of that group. Again I could be totally wrong but that's the intuition I've acquired. Of course, today, times are quite a bit different and popularizing science is "in". Just a personal observation this evening.
I still remember one of my earliest questions to you, trying to learn a bit more about you and your philos of science, your take on the world. I simply asked you if you were more a Steven Weinberg guy or a, I believe it was, a Tipler or Penrose guy, and you couldn't meet me half way with a straight answer. Sometimes facilitating a conversation means reading between the lines, giving somebody the benefit of the doubt, even playing along.
"...have you published anything anywhere?" -Ed H
Hold that thought, I predict one of us is going to end up eating the proverbial crow.
And I can't resist... What the hell would inspire such a silly absurd post on your part anyhow? I'm in total agreement with your quote if that's what he in fact said. Moreover, I'm in total agreement with his dad on the subject. So there.
It's enough at this point to know that years spent in chemistry (biochem, mol bio) and electronics and neuro (yes there is this oppo in the world) is a suberb teacher in mechanistic nature which rules out so-called libertarian free will - a major variety, pop and popularized via Abra religion, I allude to as false or illusory. Perhaps it's you on these finer subjects that needs to bone up? (After all I am wise enough not to enter your wheelhouse, aren't I.) Food for thought.
Further, I think insofar as you havent read a "popular" work - throwing this out there - like Selfish Gene, Cosmos, Demon Haunted World, God Delusion, End of Faith, How the Mind Works, The Stuff of Language, Blank Slate, The Beak of the Finch, Sacred Depths of Nature, Encountering Naturalism, The World's Religions (H Smith), Breaking the Spell, Amythia - it speaks volumes one way or another.
PS
Further, you'll find many of those books at the intersection where science, philosophy and religion meet the humanities. To what school in academia do I go to earn a degree in that venue from which I could publish (to meet apparently your criteria)? 25 years ago I didn't have an answer. But perhaps that was only because 25 years ago my path didn't cross yours where you could've set me straight?
ref: "you're reading comprehension leaves a lot to be desired.." -Ed H
Posting this because a similarly derogatory statement (just as absurd) was made several years ago (re: failing to contribute or some such ) only to be deleted later leaving a page or two of conversation of non sequitors (eg, posters talking to themselves).
|
|
feralfae
Boulder climber
in the midst of a metaphysical mystery
|
|
|
Mar 26, 2015 - 09:16pm PT
|
Thank you Moose, for your forbearance and patience, and for your excellent statement of your pattern of thought which led you to your conclusions.
I take it, then, that you see yourself as a part of a deterministic universe in which you, being a part of that deterministic universe, have no free will, although you have self-awareness and decision-making capabilities within a narrow corridor of possibilities.
I am particularly taken with your statement concerning the "turning on" of the brain of a human (infant?). Do you envision the sub-conscious structure of the mind being (at least) partially programmed for its "human-ness" prior to this "turning on" of consciousness? There is an elegance in your pattern of thought that I had not considered. Thank you.
It gives rise to the image of a hard-wired organism with an adaptable and learning OS arriving on Earth, then having software loaded according to the local culture, habitat, mores, and lares and penates.
I, too, think the brain is a purposefully-designed problem-solving, organic structure of remarkable efficiency. And I think evolution remains in action. Further, I think that with our present human capabilities and increasing understanding of the function of the brain, we have more opportunities to update our software. We now know that thought habits can be altered, rerouting the neural patterns. We are also learning that intentional consciousness (such as meditative states and guided imagery) enables us to reroute neural patterns more efficiently than most people realize.
Thank you again for you patience and carefully-worded explanation.
feralfae
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!