2
   

Consciousness is a Biological Problem

 
 
odenskrigare
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Aug, 2009 07:57 am
@Kielicious,
huh no I think electrochemical process in the brain are deterministic
xris
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Aug, 2009 08:09 am
@odenskrigare,
odenskrigare;83749 wrote:
huh no I think electrochemical process in the brain are deterministic
Determined by the action or the order they receive and from whence has not been determined, as you well know.
odenskrigare
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Aug, 2009 08:11 am
@xris,
xris;83751 wrote:
Determined by the action or the order they receive and from whence has not been determined, as you well know.


huh what are you trying to say

the computational process that is mind is set in motion by environmental stimuli
0 Replies
 
Pathfinder
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Aug, 2009 08:20 am
@Kielicious,
haha I enjoy these discussions when people can apply a little wit and humor.

By the way I have just been to the washroom so don't worry about me.

Xris is right, all of these great minds that oden is glorifying would be great indeed if they could all come to one consensus. However they do not and most of these grand issues remain mysteries and therefore constantly debatable, so choosing one over the other is a matter of faith just like religion. Its always a matter of perspective.

Free will suggests that a person is free to choose to act without constraint from some outside source or imposement. if its not free than there is a some reason for it to be hindered.

to say its illusionary means that you believe that there is nothing that could restrain a persons free choice of acting in some way. So I am totally unsure of what you mean by that.

What I am talking about is the difference between acting upon what your brain tells you to do versus acting despite what your barin tells you to do.

For instance, you are looking at a leaf that looks like a leaf on a tree but it has two eyes. Your brain tells you its a leaf because that what it sees, but your mind tel;ls you that leaves do not have eyes so you look closer despite your brains direction and you find an insect. Had you relied completely on your brain the insect would have gone undiscovered. But because we have the choice to use our minds and act contrary to our brains natural reactions, we have the ability to act supernaturally. And it is in these supernatural acts that we gain knowledge and wisdom that would go undiscovered by natural conditioning. I believe this ability to act supernaturally becomes more advanced/evolved in those wo can tune it and nurture it.

Some are happy to just look at the leaves in the trees and never know what is really sitting there. others can discover new worlds.
odenskrigare
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Aug, 2009 08:23 am
@Pathfinder,
Pathfinder;83756 wrote:
Xris is right, all of these great minds that oden is glorifying would be great indeed if they could all come to one consensus. However they do not and most of these grand issues remain mysteries and therefore constantly debatable, so choosing one over the other is a matter of faith just like religion. Its always a matter of perspective.


uh idk about that neuroscientists are starting to agree that free will is at best limited

Pathfinder;83756 wrote:
Free will suggests that a person is free to choose to act without constraint from some outside source or imposement. if its not free than there is a some reason for it to be hindered.

to say its illusionary means that you believe that there is nothing that could restrain a persons free choice of acting in some way. So I am totally unsure of what you mean by that.

What I am talking about is the difference between acting upon what your brain tells you to do versus acting despite what your barin tells you to do


Did you or did you not read the article I posted
0 Replies
 
Pathfinder
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Aug, 2009 08:28 am
@Kielicious,
I would say that ' starting to agree' answers your own question and makes my point.

And no I am not reading articles that people post in here, I am here discussing issues with members. If we are all to use other articles to make our points than I will direct you to my blog listed with my signature.

But that is not my intention when I come here to discuss.
0 Replies
 
odenskrigare
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Aug, 2009 08:33 am
@Kielicious,
oh ok but anyway basically what you're saying is that we don't always listen to our brain but what's really happening is that one part of the brain is overriding another

it's not like anything else is making decisions

and all of it is deterministic
0 Replies
 
salima
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Aug, 2009 08:37 am
@Kielicious,
the nyt article is interesting, i really like it. it isnt conclusive, it covers a lot of possibilities, but i came up with a different interpretation of the results of the experiment here:
"In the 1970s, Benjamin Libet, a physiologist at the University of California, San Francisco, wired up the brains of volunteers to an electroencephalogram and told the volunteers to make random motions, like pressing a button or flicking a finger, while he noted the time on a clock.
Dr. Libet found that brain signals associated with these actions occurred half a second before the subject was conscious of deciding to make them.
The order of brain activities seemed to be perception of motion, and then decision, rather than the other way around.
In short, the conscious brain was only playing catch-up to what the unconscious brain was already doing. Dr. Libet's results have been reproduced again and again over the years, along with other experiments that suggest that people can be easily fooled when it comes to assuming ownership of their actions."

from the above results, i would suggest that we might have free will but it is on a subconscious level-in other words, we are not aware of what our true choices are, but we do indeed choose them. the illusion is that we are making certain conscious choices which we are not in fact making at all, but very effectively opposing on another level.
odenskrigare
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Aug, 2009 08:38 am
@Kielicious,
maybe they are made unconsciously but they are made deterministically

nobody would claim that any other machine has free will
0 Replies
 
Pathfinder
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Aug, 2009 09:35 am
@Kielicious,
One part of the brain overriding another?

Isn't it all one brain in the same body!

The only time we see one part overriding another part is when there is some sort of disfunction of the brain as in parkinsons, or any disease that causes the brain to malfunction.

I have seen experiments where people are connected to computer interfaces and able to move external mechanisms by thought alone, no keyboard command, but simply by thinking about the movement they want to make.

The electrical stimulation of the brain and its capabilities during natural action and reaction are all due to immediate stimuli. This is all natural brain function, if the brain is not diseased or injured.

But to choose to act in difference to what the brain wants you to do based upon its reading and interpretation of the stimuli it is exposed to, is something that goes beyond the natural reaction of the brain matter and electical firing.

Its is certainly not just some other part of the brain trying to intercede. When your brain tells your stomach to vomit because of stimuli, the part that you use to clean the toilet afterwards isnt going to cut in and and say never mind.

What it is that causes a person to try to hold back the urge until they reach an appropriate place to vomit is not brain firing, it is mind. Their brain certainly is trying to get the body to do what it wants or thinks is the natural thing to do according to what it is presented with. the mind however has a different idea if you will.
odenskrigare
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Aug, 2009 09:40 am
@Pathfinder,
Pathfinder;83769 wrote:
One part of the brain overriding another?

Isn't it all one brain in the same body!

The only time we see one part overriding another part is when there is some sort of disfunction of the brain as in parkinsons


Prefrontal cortex - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[indent]The most typical psychological term for functions carried out by the pre-frontal cortex area is executive function. Executive function relates to abilities to differentiate among conflicting thoughts, determine good and bad, better and best, same and different, future consequences of current activities, working toward a defined goal, prediction of outcomes, expectation based on actions, and social "control" (the ability to suppress urges that, if not suppressed, could lead to socially-unacceptable outcomes).[/indent]

oh hey wow didn't know having a prefrontal cortex was a dysfunction
0 Replies
 
Aedes
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Aug, 2009 10:20 am
@Pathfinder,
Pathfinder;83769 wrote:
One part of the brain overriding another?

Isn't it all one brain in the same body!

The only time we see one part overriding another part is when there is some sort of disfunction of the brain as in parkinsons, or any disease that causes the brain to malfunction.
No, just in normal physiologic function this happens. A good example is how your basal ganglia and cerebellum suppress abnormal movements. Or how your conscious (cortical) control of breathing will override your brainstem's unconscious control of it.
xris
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Aug, 2009 10:59 am
@Aedes,
If you could accept the fact that the "I" is a separate entity to the brain how would you prove it was false ? How do you prove it is? The question is open to all those who have conclusive proof.
0 Replies
 
odenskrigare
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Aug, 2009 11:41 am
@Kielicious,
I don't accept that there is a distinct "I"

Hume was really ahead of his time on this one

see what happens when you sever a person's corpus callosum

no really
xris
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Aug, 2009 12:07 pm
@odenskrigare,
odenskrigare;83791 wrote:
I don't accept that there is a distinct "I"

Hume was really ahead of his time on this one

see what happens when you sever a person's corpus callosum

no really
Oh Hume proved it conclusively,did he? Thats news to me...
0 Replies
 
odenskrigare
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Aug, 2009 12:11 pm
@Kielicious,
cut somebody's corpus callosum if you don't believe me
0 Replies
 
Aedes
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Aug, 2009 12:35 pm
@Kielicious,
Uh, sorry Oden, but I've seen people who have had their corpus callosum cut (callosotomy) and they are decidedly not two people.

This is a fairly frequently-performed procedure for people with intractable epilepsy, and most such patients I've seen had callosotomy for this indication. I've also seen children with congenital agenesis of the corpus callosum, and I've seen a few people with parasaggital tumors who have needed surgical ablation of the corpus callosum to remove the tumor.

Two people in the same body? Not remotely. One person with difficulty integrating sensory input from both sides, but still one person.
0 Replies
 
odenskrigare
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Aug, 2009 12:45 pm
@Kielicious,
yeah I guess that was kind of glib

but it's like one person definitely "split" in some senses

but there's nothing you can point to in the brain that you can identify and say "hey that's him"

a person's identity is spread all over the brain

i.e. Hume's bundle theory
Aedes
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Aug, 2009 12:54 pm
@Kielicious,
That's right, identity isn't reducible to a structure or a side. Also keep in mind that the corpus callosum isn't the only commisure between the hemispheres -- the thalamus also serves to connect the two sides.
0 Replies
 
xris
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Aug, 2009 01:09 pm
@odenskrigare,
odenskrigare;83807 wrote:
yeah I guess that was kind of glib

but it's like one person definitely "split" in some senses

but there's nothing you can point to in the brain that you can identify and say "hey that's him"

a person's identity is spread all over the brain

i.e. Hume's bundle theory
So what does that indicate? Its not as well defined as you would like it to be. If you cant point to a specific area then it might just be ethereal.
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
Paradigm shifts - Question by Cyracuz
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 01/16/2025 at 05:39:17