Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2016 - 07:53pm PT
|
gasoholic, after i read that i started wondering what your point may be?
so i started over and see this was written by a woman. Do you think what she wrote would appulie apply to a man's behavior, and a woman's, both?
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2016 - 08:43pm PT
|
. . . and thus no one can have direct access to reality, given that the most we can know is that which is filtered through the brain's responses to reality. His best known dictum is "The map is not the territory"
Can we all accept this Kantian notion and move on?
An awful lot of stuff being plastered on this poor thread.
If you mean the comment in a metaphorical sense, then it’s “an approximation.” It’s mythological, a story. You're kinda sorta just talking. You’re no scientist. You don’t appear know what science is. It’s a method. It’s not a finding. Moronic. (MikeL)
Please read up on the definition of "approximation" . . . you are way off in some empty pasture on this one. And you are no scientist either.
|
|
MH2
Boulder climber
Andy Cairns
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2016 - 08:52pm PT
|
The map is not the territory.
attributed to the wonderfully named Alfred Habdank Skarbek Korzybski.
But how would he know that if:
the most we can know is that which is filtered through the brain's responses to reality
|
|
MH2
Boulder climber
Andy Cairns
|
|
|
Apr 19, 2016 - 07:53am PT
|
Other problems:
The map is not the territory.
This is a truism, like, "Your mother is not your father."
It is presumably meant to convey some deeper truth such as
the most we can know is that which is filtered through the brain's responses to reality
Which implies a thing called 'we' or perhaps 'you,' a sort of homunculus residing somewhere inside your body that is looking out at the world through your senses.
From a biological perspective, organisms are collections of cells specialized for different jobs yet cooperating for the overriding purpose of reproducing the collective. Because of the specialization, one part of you may know something that another part does not. Which would be the map and which the territory?
Are instinctive behaviors "filtered through the brain's responses to reality" or are they built-in and triggered by sensory inputs?
And what is meant by 'knowing?' My body has the ability to manipulate glucose to get energy for doing work. Does that mean I know glycolysis?
But, trying to take the phrase on its own terms, since all you know of the world is your mental map of it then how could you become aware of an off-the-map area called the territory? Your map and your territory are the same.
I believe that at the base of this issue is the simple fact that we don't know everything. I see no need to complicate that idea.
|
|
MikeL
Social climber
Seattle, WA
|
|
|
Apr 19, 2016 - 09:55am PT
|
Cintune:
Analogies should be problematical for anyone who is a scientific skeptic, as Novella claims to be. Analogies (metaphors) seem to have mysterious properties. They present one thing in terms of another based upon selected structural characteristics, and in doing so, they generate both comfort and familiarity (“Oh, yeah, I see that”) and some discomfort (“but it’s not completely like that, though, is it?”). Those properties give rise to anxiety or excitement (depending upon how much comfort *and* discomfort they generate). At best, it seems, metaphors are very suggestive and help us to talk about those things we can’t pin down accurately and don’t have the language for. Metaphors are the language of ambiguity.
When the Internet first started to emerge (back before Netscape was a glint in the eyes of folks at UIUC), people really didn’t understand what it was or how it was supposed to (or would) work. They initially called it the “information superhighway.” Technologists and entrepreneurs used the metaphor to consider what might or could be done with it. Would there be off-ramps? Would there be intersections? Would there be big-rig transportation vehicles? Should the information superhighway first go to large metropolitan locations and then later to the small towns on small roads? Of course, many of those conceptual extensions were unproductive and led us to believe we understood more than we did at the time.
Are atoms like the solar system? Does the mind evolve in the same way as biological systems? Structural mapping applied from one domain to another can be creative and suggestive, but they are ultimately inaccurate.
In the last (or most considered) analysis, everything appears to be unique *and* remarkably similar *as pristine experience.* (At least that’s what it looks like to me.)
Jgill: And you are no scientist either.
Gosh, I thought I was / am in that I do / did empirical research and published it that relied upon the scientific method. Do you know differently? Perhaps you should tell me what a scientist is. I attempt to stay out of pastures I don’t know anything about or haven’t studied in my professional efforts. I also have some relevant training. I am also employed in those areas. It's my practice.
|
|
MikeL
Social climber
Seattle, WA
|
|
|
Apr 19, 2016 - 10:00am PT
|
MH2: Your map and your territory are the same.
If you truly believe this, then consciousness IS reality.
|
|
BASE104
Social climber
An Oil Field
|
|
|
Apr 19, 2016 - 10:39am PT
|
I'm in it for the conversation.
Me too. I feel like there are some pretty smart people on this and the other thread. The diversity of experience greatly adds to the interest.
I might get into it with somebody, but it isn't like I don't like the person. This thread has stayed remarkably polite and respectful. I would love to go hang out for a week with the major posters on this thread. Just to listen, mainly. I'm not a zen Buddhist, so I have nothing to offer when that comes up. I would like to talk to folks in a more personal medium. Like over a cup of coffee.
|
|
PSP also PP
Trad climber
Berkeley
|
|
|
Apr 19, 2016 - 10:58am PT
|
Nice posts LG; To me she is showing how do people typically relate to their environment at this point in their lives and that can change and that there is a process (Practice) if done diligently can help a person transform themselves from being habitually self oriented to being more selfless. And it involves a dedicated witnessing/questioning of our lives (thoughts, actions, feelings).
This thread often talks about studying mind as an object outside of us (scientific study of mind) or someone else's mind. What about actually looking at your own mind; what do you see, what do you get?
What I have noticed is how habitual I am and to cut off the habit (by not doing it even once) allows a new experience or view. One of those habits would be if someone insults me; the habit is to dislike them label/define them an a##hole. The alternative is to not personalize what they say and watch them and wonder what is going on for them what is the root of their anger; recognizing their insult as suffering and that they are suffering.
But the habit to personalize another's insult is strong deeply embedded and it takes work to perceive it; and even when you perceive it often the habit still takes over and responding with an counter insult takes place.
Is mind our very lives moment to moment?
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Apr 19, 2016 - 11:24am PT
|
"This thread often talks about studying mind as an object outside of us (scientific study of mind) or someone else's mind. What about actually looking at your own mind; what do you see, what do you get?" -psppp
Actually this thread covers the mental life (one of my favorite subjects) and its inner study (introspection) quite a bit. One of the points (criticisms, reminders) is that there's a lot more to exploring and discovering the mental life - and proactively partaking in it - than (just) Zen... than being present... than letting go of self-interests.... than the map is not the territory... and its nice to get the rest too.
"Is mind our very lives moment to moment?" -psppp
Yes. From one pov. (Hence the term, "the mental life")
Corollary: Is our consciousness our very lives moment to moment? Yes. From one point of view.
introspection: the practice, otherwise art or style of looking at your own mind, your own mental life
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Apr 19, 2016 - 11:49am PT
|
re: exploring the mental life
Several times over several years I suggested to Largo that he conduct a little mental life (otherwise neurophysiologic) experiment insofar as he was interested in qualia, consciousness, perception, sentience and serious discussion. That entailed lying in a dark room in pitch black and wiggling a finger around in the corner of his eye and noting the resulting visual perception. The experiment is extremely interesting if not enlightening to many a fan of the "mental life" because it entails the perception of light when, because of the setting, there is no light (no photons), only stimulation of retinal cells to produce the perception of light. It seemed all I got each time was no response, a little shuck and jive and redirect. (Same re other simple, straight-up inquiries too, btw, re evolution, for eg.) That's when it was reinforced to me that this thread was about just posting and just having virtual digital conversation as much as anything.
re: exploring, partaking in, the mental life
Another great approach to this practice, otherwise art, is drugs, man, including but not limited to salvia divinorum and general anesthesia. These are go to sources for many an insight into mental life, neurophysiological function, etc.. Highly recommended as a learning tool.
|
|
jstan
climber
|
|
|
Apr 19, 2016 - 12:03pm PT
|
People often wake up in the morning with some words they want to use. Straightforward option is just to post them here.
|
|
eeyonkee
Trad climber
Golden, CO
|
|
|
Apr 19, 2016 - 12:16pm PT
|
I've met you Moose. It's just a hunch, but I'd be betting that your reality IS a dream.
|
|
cintune
climber
Colorado School of Mimes
|
|
|
Apr 19, 2016 - 12:23pm PT
|
People often wake up in the morning with some words they want to use. Straightforward option is just to post them here.
Bosphorus.
Reticulated.
Amnesiac.
|
|
paul roehl
Boulder climber
california
|
|
|
Apr 19, 2016 - 12:51pm PT
|
For the record, I too believe it's a simulation, as a betting option, as much as anything else.
It's interesting that a simulation, a hologram, that these ideas would seem to require at least the consideration of a creator. Who's making the simulation? As well, within the structure of said simulation why not gods? Magic? Woo? If the creator of said simulation is so inclined.
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Apr 19, 2016 - 01:04pm PT
|
"It's interesting that a simulation, a hologram, that these ideas would seem to require at least the consideration of a creator."
True. But then such a Creator would be a night and day difference from God Jehovah / God Jesus of Abrahamic supernaturalism. Or from any of the old gods invented by iron-age era men. If you've read my posts carefully, I have been clear about this from the beginning.
If you can't distinguish between the God of Moses (God Jehovah God Jesus) and Diacrates (my own placeholder for an einsteinian god figure), then that's a problem and there's not much more we can discuss.
I'm even open to a simulation "theology" (as cited by Chalmers-Harris in aforementioned podcast).
within the structure of said simulation why not gods? Magic? Woo? If the creator of said simulation is so inclined. -Paul R
Once you're open (intellectually/spiritually) to the "brain in a vat" hypothesis, you can't rule out anything with 100.0000% certainty. That's the power of the hypothesis and that explains all the speculative interest around it. But then, if you're a practical sort (I try to be in this life) it comes down to probabilities.
The Second Coming of Christ to Independence, Missouri? Not very probable, ime.
|
|
paul roehl
Boulder climber
california
|
|
|
Apr 19, 2016 - 01:13pm PT
|
True. But then such a Creator would be a night and day difference from God Jehovah / God Jesus of Abrahamic supernaturalism. Or from any of the old gods invented by iron-age era men. If you've read my posts carefully, I have been clear about this from the beginning.
But how can you know the nature of such a creator as you're just another element within his simulation? And if you consider the nature of the universe as a simulation then its elements become arbitrary (to some extent) to the creator of that simulation. What's to stop said creator from including Jehovah and Zeus and any other deity, or any kind of magic or woo in that simulation?
It seems such a theory requires the athiest to reconsider their position.
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Apr 19, 2016 - 01:18pm PT
|
"But how can you know..." Paul R
ANS 56 years of life experience. Paying close attention (to the best of my abilities) to causation and probabilities. The world, just as Carl Sagan emphasized, has always seemed to me completely intelligible. Also, completely obedient to an underlying mechanistic rule structure.
Haven't seen too many burning bushes in the biblical tradition. Nor too many winged horses.
"What's to stop said creator from including Jehovah and Zeus and any other deity, or any kind of magic or woo in that simulation?"
Admittedly, Sam Harris' nightmare. :)
.....
It's nice having you around, Moose.
|
|
paul roehl
Boulder climber
california
|
|
|
Apr 19, 2016 - 01:33pm PT
|
Paul, it is because this reality has rules, as revealed by scientific studies. Maybe the Creator designed our reality that way, or maybe "he" had to follow his natural laws. Without them, chaos would take over. That's not what we observe. No sight of Zeus, Shiva, or Jesus.
But wait a minute... if your reality is a simulation created by some entity then it is open to the arbitrary concerns and interests of that entity. Your experience may be one of order in the past but if the creator wants chaos then there will be chaos. You can't even be sure you're in a simulation but you would have us believe you know what the creator of that simulation is concerned with.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!