stdPikachu
Plughole in bathtub curve
FridgeMagnet said:
Most. Appropriate. H2G2. Reference. Ever.
The Rational Proof of God's Existence
- Thread starter phildwyer
- Start date
- Status
Most. Appropriate. H2G2. Reference. Ever.
Jo/Joe said:
How do you know what is a product of the mind and what is simply innate?
Your brain is capable of recieving 4 billion pieces of information every second, on average we`re aware of 2000 of them. If we exist in this state of dormancy now then who can rule out anything? The fact is we perceive what? 0.5% of the EM spectrum? We are asleep in terms of awareness (or conciousness).
Its perfectly plausible to suggest that the brain is a medium meant to relay instructions to the bio-mechanical body from your spirit or conciousness. Its like the way you need a modem to be logged onto the internet, the brain gives you your window into not-so-hyper space. Thats why the whole point of meditation is to cut yourself away from the mind, to retreat back from the window. Trust.
onemonkey
winmonkey
no it is not because where is this "you" that your brain is the gateway to?Azrael23 said:
you are your brain... and that is all that you are.. the human brain is a pretty remarkable thing but it is at same time pretty feeble and very mundane..
it is a total lie to say we don't use all of our brain.. we do.. it is to energy expensive not to.. it's just that we don't know how we use it..
although we've got a good idea and basically we use it much the same way that chimps and bonobos use their brains... to solve the problems associated with food, fucking and friendship
fractionMan
Custom Title
oooh. look mum, facts!Azrael23 said:
onemonkey said:
But we could use our brains better for the purposes we wanted to rather than for the purposes we evolved for... and it's possible some of it isn't really properly used - evolution isn't perfect. Anyway you aren't your brain, that's like saying a story is the book it is written in.
onemonkey
winmonkey
no.. you really are your brain.. in the sense that there isn't a soul or some other homunculus sitting in there watching the world through your eyes.888 said:
and there is no easy hardware/software analogy that works for the brain either.. all that messy gunk is necessary to make you who you are.. you couldn't exist any other way
Yes you could! Are you saying you'd stop existing if you gradually replaced bits of your brain with artificial equivalents? How do you know, anyway? I bet I could remove half my brain cells and still be me, OR remove the other half and still be me (may or may not be technically true but do you see the point I am trying to make?).
Anyway, all soul means, stripped to its bare essentials is the personal experience - which isn't the brain - unless you are a pig-headedly literal materialist.
Anyway, all soul means, stripped to its bare essentials is the personal experience - which isn't the brain - unless you are a pig-headedly literal materialist.
Why resurrect terms with loads of crappy religious baggage to mean things that have more appropriate descriptions anyway, though? The word 'soul' has a whole host of associations for most people which are unrelated to your definition of it above - surely it's best not to confuse them unnecessarily.
But personal experience is all in the brain, it's recorded as a set of neurones firing a set of impulses, said the pig-headed literal materialist.
If I were to replace bits or all of a brain with identical artificial replacements then this brain would have the same personal experiences as the original one.
If I were to replace bits or all of a brain with identical artificial replacements then this brain would have the same personal experiences as the original one.
Agent Sparrow
the age of slippers and migraines
People who suffer frontal lobe damage drastically change their personalities. While (depending on the damage), they may "feel" like them, if their emotional respsonses are completely altered so much it changes their personality, then strictly speaking, they are no longer the person they were.* **888 said:
You take away a bit of your brain, it takes away a bit of you. You take away all your brain, you no longer exist. If you were to have a brain transplant for example, you would no longer be you. You consciousness is created by the connections in your synapses, and can no further be removed from your physical brain as, oh I dunno, something completely impossible. Perhaps on day, if technology became incrediably advanced, you could make fake brain parts. However, considering mapping the brain is an impossible task because so much of your memory is difusely located (and from what I understand, somewhat differently for everyone), I doubt you could ever program those bits to be "you".
Onemonkey is right - you are your brain. And your brain is you.
*<edit> I would like to point out that obviously this assertion does somewhat rely on the level of damage - someone for example just losing control of their hand obviously is still them for all practical intents and purposes, especially as there are examples of people losing localised movement through brain damage, and then creating new connections which enable the part of the body to be used again, which incidently is very
in my eyes!** though obviously they are still the person they are now iyswim
bluestreak
HomosexualityIsStalin’sAtomBombtoDestroyAmerica
onemonkey said:
QUOTED BECAUSE IT IS ABOUT THE MOST USEFUL THING ANYONE HAS SAID IN PAGES.
*leaves again until phildwyer comes back so we can pick on him some more*
Crispy said:
Yup. The least mad is in Penrose's The Emperor's New Mind but in my very humble opinion it's still barking. It's clear to me that he started from the conclusion that mind couldn't be a material activity of brain, and proceeded to look for "evidence" (which he found in a misunderstanding of Gödel) and for mechanisms (which he found in the odd ideas of one Hammeroff).
Don't get me wrong - I agree that Penrose is brilliant within his field. Just not on this. I certainly wouldn't take his fashion advice, either.
And to be even fairer, it's not entirely clear whether Penrose himself sees the alleged mechanism as an interface, or whether he sees it merely as a means of introducing randomness. As I recall it, he only explicitly claims the randomness bit.
Really must do some work now - a search here on "Penrose" or even for posts by me containing "Penrose" will reveal much more.
goldenecitrone
post tenebras lux
Crispy said:
God, obviously.
camouflage
gaslit at scale.
onemonkey said:
I think that's the thing about the religious, in their ego they are unable to accept how boring/mundane/fleshy and miraculous the brain; and for that matter nature in general, is.
Brains are associated with fucking fighting and friendship (er...) by emergance, there is no 'drawing board'.
Purdie
there are no stars, only suns
Crispy said:
5-element theory
Accupuncture does reach the parts that the pharmaceuticals can't, especially when it comes to the mind.
There loads of guinea pigging going on with brainscans and the effects of accupunture on brainchemistry. Could find some links when i got some more time
If only them meridians weren't so elusive.
Crispy
The following psytrance is baṉned: All
Purdie said:5-element theory
Accupuncture does reach the parts that the pharmaceuticals can't, especially when it comes to the mind.
There loads of guinea pigging going on with brainscans and the effects of accupunture on brainchemistry. Could find some links when i got some more time
If only them meridians weren't so elusive.
I don't doubt the efficiacy of acupuncture - it works (and much better than a placebo). However, I expect the results of the aforementioned guineapigging (what a wonderful turn of phrase!) to show a material explanation for acupuncture.
What we'd be looking for in the brain would be neurons firing spontaneously in curious ways, etc. Of course, such action would violate 2nd law of thermodynamics, but let's not let that rusty old thing get in the way
Purdie
there are no stars, only suns
Crispy said:... However, I expect the results of the aforementioned guineapigging (what a wonderful turn of phrase!) to show a material explanation for acupuncture.
What we'd be looking for in the brain would be neurons firing spontaneously in curious ways, etc. Of course, such action would violate 2nd law of thermodynamics, but let's not let that rusty old thing get in the way
Don't know much of neurons. Other than a lot of mine are past their useable lifespan
Main problem with chinese med in general is that their concept of human biology is nothing like the western model.
On top of that i was told once:
Spirit was an integral part of chinese meds as it developed over the the last few millenia. It was the chinese version of psychology and psychiatry to a degree. If you study Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) now you get thaught very little, if anything of that side of the art. Unless you specialize in something like Tui Na (baby massage). Most old style practitioners can do wonders for the psyche in one session. If you study TCM now it's a lot more biomedically/biochemically orientated and the real knowledge for the science types is to be found in fields of electroaccupuncture.
I will get some links later...
Bob_the_lost
Elsewhere
So, is there a god?
I'd read the thread, but my head hurts after a while.
I'd read the thread, but my head hurts after a while.
The difference being? The part of the mind that produces our sense of value for something is innate. It has to be, there has to be some genetic foundation to the brain so that it can organise sensory data.
We're not asleep, our brains just organise what we perceive so that some data is assigned to sub-conscious activity and some is what we are aware of when we are conscious. I don't want to have to think about every single thing if some other part of my mind can handle it. That's why we can correct ourselves instinctively if we are about to slip on ice for example. Our brains are great.
Consciousness is an emergent property of the brain which is part of our body. The two are so interrelated that the modem analogy is unnecessary. It's more like being connected to the internet without a modem.
I do trust. We are very fortunate beings to possess such complex and capable lumps of grey matter.
Purdie
there are no stars, only suns
Crispy said:I don't doubt the efficiacy of acupuncture - it works (and much better than a placebo). However, I expect the results of the aforementioned guineapigging (what a wonderful turn of phrase!) to show a material explanation for acupuncture.
What we'd be looking for in the brain would be neurons firing spontaneously in curious ways, etc. Of course, such action would violate 2nd law of thermodynamics, but let's not let that rusty old thing get in the way
fMRI Neurophysiological evidence for the existence of acupuncture meridians
Japan, China, South Korea Work Together to Standardize Acupuncture Points
Poor rats :-(
A bit on neurons in the above link:
A Review of the Evidence for the Existence of Acupuncture Points and Meridians
Hope i got them links right
FridgeMagnet
Administrator
Randomness as far as I remember. He's concerned with proving that brain function is non-computational, disproving strong AI. He's not a godbotherer or a soul merchant, he just wants to show indeterminacy in the actions of the brain and thus the mind - in fact he is a materialist, his argument wouldn't work otherwise.laptop said:
Been a while since I read Penrose, I must admit. I don't agree with him by the way.
parallelepipete
Aelod cysylltiol y Taliban Cymraeg
Were you conscious by virtue of having a neural tube as an early embryo? Were you conscious pre-implantation? Or is this a reference to Buddhist reincarnation?ZWord said:
- Status
Similar threads
