2
   

Consciousness is a Biological Problem

 
 
richrf
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Aug, 2009 09:08 am
@salima,
salima;86257 wrote:
can it be as simple as 'consciousness is the sum of all experience'???


Sounds good to me. Certainly an option since it gives some more meat to the concept.

salima;86257 wrote:
i really think we should have kielicious decide...! i know i am now thoroughly confused.


Well, that is what I always look for .... confusion. It makes me think and re-orient my way of looking at things.

One of the great sources of confusion for me are the various interpretations and experiments involving quantum physics. It keeps my mind very active and constantly changing, which is the way I like it. Albeit, thankfully, it doesn't make me ill as it did many of the early quantum physicists.

Rich
odenskrigare
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Aug, 2009 09:10 am
@richrf,
richrf;86259 wrote:
One of the great sources of confusion for me are the various interpretations and experiments involving quantum physics. It keeps my mind very active and constantly changing, which is the way I like it. Albeit, thankfully, it doesn't make me ill as it did many of the early quantum physicists.


it would be nice if you learned about quantum physics from somewhere else than What the Bleep Do We Know?
0 Replies
 
richrf
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Aug, 2009 09:16 am
@odenskrigare,
odenskrigare;86258 wrote:
quantifying and clarifying concepts is not pretentious


If you wish to clarify, then use simple words. I never use the word qi unless I am trying to explain a concept to someone who wishes to understand the Chinese metaphysical view of life. I am not trying to confuse people or show off. I like to keep things very simple.

odenskrigare;86258 wrote:
for example, the vague idea of "yin" tells us nothing about why people get altitude sickness at high elevations


Absolutely does, but from a different perspective and jargon.

odenskrigare;86258 wrote:
the modern scientific concepts of how the air becomes thin at high altitudes because there's less pressure, how the blood carries oxygen, how the brain uses so much of that oxygen, and how the brain (and muscles and so on) are ultimately deprived of oxygen from this environment and perform poorly explain it


Making things complicated does not necessarily make it better. Occam's razor.

odenskrigare;86258 wrote:
"yin" on the other hand doesn't do diddly for that, or anything else


For you nothing. For me, it has kept be healthy for the last 30 years. No pharmaceuticals and no doctor visits. However, I do practice yoga and Tai Chi, as well as eat well and do self massage (Chinese Tuina), to improve my energy (qi), blood (yin) and breathing (prana). It is a simple matter of knowledge of simple concepts.


odenskrigare;86258 wrote:
rich I don't use fancy words for their own sake. you do. I prefer things to be simple and really the only reason I use fancy words and concepts is because they have a higher explanatory or predictive power than their alternatives


OK. I will use energy and blood. You use any fancy words or simple words you want to use. It doesn't matter to me.

Rich
odenskrigare
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Aug, 2009 09:26 am
@richrf,
richrf;86261 wrote:
If you wish to clarify, then use simple words. I never use the word qi unless I am trying to explain a concept to someone who wishes to understand the Chinese metaphysical view of life. I am not trying to confuse people or show off. I like to keep things very simple.


"metabolism" isn't a 10 dollar word

richrf;86261 wrote:
Absolutely does, but from a different perspective and jargon.


ok, tell us the Iron Age delusion approach to altitude sickness, and why oxygen tanks for mountain climbing were invented in the West

richrf;86261 wrote:
Making things complicated does not necessarily make it better. Occam's razor.


William of Ockham would have probably spat at your feet if he ever met you

richrf;86261 wrote:
For you nothing. For me, it has kept be healthy for the last 30 years. No pharmaceuticals and no doctor visits. However, I do practice yoga and Tai Chi, as well as eat well and do self massage (Chinese Tuina), to improve my energy (qi), blood (yin) and breathing (prana). It is a simple matter of knowledge of simple concepts.


your experience is exceptional

things like cancer happen even to people with good lifestyles. if it happens to you someday, I'll give odds you'll use more than TCM to fight it

have you never taken antibiotics? gotten vaccinations? what's the TCM or TIM approach to eradicating polio or smallpox?

richrf;86261 wrote:
OK. I will use energy and blood. You use any fancy words or simple words you want to use. It doesn't matter to me


explaining things precisely and clearly is not a mark of a mysterious scientific priesthood. I have patiently and unreservedly explained very basic stuff in this forum to people like you for months and I would appreciate it if you tried to pay attention

you might as well just revert to speaking Old English if you hate "fancy words" so much
richrf
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Aug, 2009 09:40 am
@odenskrigare,
odenskrigare;86263 wrote:
explaining things precisely and clearly is not a mark of a mysterious scientific priesthood.


Maybe no, but it sure seems to be part of the initiation ceremony.

Anyway, when I wanted to get a clear description of Wheeler's Delayed-Choice Gedanken, I went right to the source, and Wheeler didn't fail me. He gave me a very clear and simple to understand description using a baseball diamond metaphor. When someone clearly understands a concept there is no need to resort to fancy words.

Rich
0 Replies
 
odenskrigare
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Aug, 2009 09:42 am
@odenskrigare,
odenskrigare;86263 wrote:
have you never taken antibiotics? gotten vaccinations? what's the TCM or TIM approach to eradicating polio or smallpox?


answer my questions please
richrf
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Aug, 2009 09:54 am
@odenskrigare,
odenskrigare;86267 wrote:
answer my questions please


As I have said, during the last 30 years, I have taken:

1) No antibiotics

2) No pharmaceutical drugs of any kind

3) I have not been to see any allopathic physician at any time, and have not had to.

4) I have had minor health problems usually related to some diet habits that I have taken care of by myself or through Chinese Tuina massage techniques.

Relative to my friends, and other people my age, who have very serious health issues, one might say I am in excellent health.

So, to get back on topic:

I am in good health because I am conscious (aware) of elements of good health which I have learned through experience - i.e. nutritious and fresh vegetables, fruits, whole grains, etc, moderate and consistent movement/exercise, proper breathing from the abdomen, relaxation, etc.

These are things I am conscious of. It is interesting, once it becomes part of me, and I repeat it many times, I am no longer thinking about it constantly, but it becomes part of my mind/body memory and does not require any overt thinking. It is like a good tennis stroke. It is automatic.

Consciousness comes from awareness from experience.

Rich
odenskrigare
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Aug, 2009 10:01 am
@richrf,
richrf;86268 wrote:
As I have said, during the last 30 years, I have taken:

1) No antibiotics

2) No pharmaceutical drugs of any kind

3) I have not been to see any allopathic physician at any time, and have not had to.

4) I have had minor health problems usually related to some diet habits that I have taken care of by myself or through Chinese Tuina massage techniques


but you're older than 30 years

so did you take antibiotics or vaccinations before that?

I mean do you at least have measles, mumps and rubella vaccinations?

if not, don't come near me, it's well known that TCM doesn't fix any of that ****

China Vows to Eradicate Measles by 2012 -- china.org.cn

Laughing
BrightNoon
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Aug, 2009 10:44 am
@salima,
salima;86257 wrote:
there is a part of us that IS aware of more than the part of us that is taking part in this discussion. so there is in fact besides consciousness or awareness a something that is conscious or aware. isnt there? hmm...


Yes, I think so. Not everything in consciousness receives our attention equally. For example, right now, the slight sensation of hunger that I'm experiencing is hardly noticable in comparison to the thoughts that I'm experiencing and the sensual experience of pressing keys on my computer.

Quote:
my thoughts originally had centered around the idea of sensory information being received by consciousness-but this is only a name i give to some part of the brain. and as rich said, there is the danger of our defining consciousness in such a way that there is no need to discuss it because the way we define it becomes purely biological.


Agreed.

Quote:
so in other words, i would ask bright noon regarding your definition "the sum of all experience of sensation or thought"....would perception be more accurate than sensation? for instance, there may be some sensation that goes unnoticed for whatever reason-being drunk or whatever. then i have to ask why mention senses at all? is consciousness the sum of all experience and thought? experience is very subjective...maybe that is what we are looking for? and i also began wondering: when we think, arent we experiencing our thought?


A few things. 1) If you mean that 'sensation' as used in my definition refers to the biological understanding of sensation, that is not the case. I don't mean to refer to external stimuli affecting sense organs. Moreover, I hope no one else is using 'sensation' in that sense because, as you say, that precludes debate of the question (is consciousness a biological problem?). I mean the pure qualia as experienced, nothing more, nothing less. 2) If a sensation (qualia) goes competely unnoticed, then it isn't a sensation, is it? We aren't going to say that qualia exists independently of our experience of them, are we? No, sensation is subjective, sensation is phenomneological, sensation is experienced. As I noted earlier though, some sensations are experienced more distinctly or powerfully than others. 3) I think you may be getting at a problem that I was anticipating; 'BrightNoon, why the use of both sensation and thought?' Everyone but me may find my inclusion of these two terms unneccessary because they are included under the heading 'experience;' they are both a sort of experience, and together, they account for all experience. So why not leave them out and just use 'the sum of all experience?' I wanted to include these two categories of experience specifically because my theory of consiousness, which I'd like to present if we ever get into the substance of the debate, rests on an certain udnerstanding of the relationship between them. Namely, that thought is composed of sensation; that thought is a complex of sensation, and the two differ only by degree. This is also important for my explanation of the relationship between consciousness and the external world which we all assume exists independently of our experience of it. So, in other words, we could cut out sensation and thought from the definition is people like. I could just as easily, once the debate gets going, offer my description of what constitutes experience: i.e. sensation and thought.

So, it's up to you Salima. We (you and I, who voted for my first definition), could stick with the original or go with 'the sum of all experience' instead. Or of course you could could cross the aisle altogether...but you better not! :bigsmile:

EDIT: richrf, I just noticed that you posted that 'the sum of all experience' is acceptable to you? Shall I take that as a vote? Salima, same question to you. Do you vote for that? If so, I do as well. That makes three!
richrf
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Aug, 2009 10:55 am
@BrightNoon,
BrightNoon;86276 wrote:
EDIT: richrf, I just noticed that you posted that 'the sum of all experience' is acceptable to you? Shall I take that as a vote? Salima, same question to you. Do you vote for that? If so, I do as well. That makes three!


Yes, that would be fine with me. My only issue with the word Awareness, as the sole definition, is that it is simply substituting one open-ended, ambiguous word, for another. So the whole effort of defining consciousness has gotten us no where other than another word.

But all of the definitions are open-ended enough so that the discussion can go anywhere. Your definition and Salima's does seem to add a little more meat to the effort - i.e. we have added the notions of experience, sum, sensation to the definition.

Rich
0 Replies
 
odenskrigare
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Aug, 2009 10:57 am
@odenskrigare,
odenskrigare;86270 wrote:
but you're older than 30 years

so did you take antibiotics or vaccinations before that?

I mean do you at least have measles, mumps and rubella vaccinations?

if not, don't come near me, it's well known that TCM doesn't fix any of that ****

China Vows to Eradicate Measles by 2012 -- china.org.cn

Laughing


quoted for truth
0 Replies
 
richrf
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Aug, 2009 11:03 am
@odenskrigare,
odenskrigare;86270 wrote:
but you're older than 30 years

so did you take antibiotics or vaccinations before that?

I mean do you at least have measles, mumps and rubella vaccinations?

if not, don't come near me, it's well known that TCM doesn't fix any of that ****

China Vows to Eradicate Measles by 2012 -- china.org.cn




Why are you worried about being near someone who has not been immunized? You are immunized aren't you? You are safe, right?

When I was young they didn't have that many vaccinations (thank goodness) and the physicians were a little more careful of what they were injecting into new born and possible unintended long term consequences which have never been studied. There was no such thing as mumps or rubella vaccinations - and guess what, our generation survived! I just developed natural immunity like most other people my age. Surprise! However, I did take some allopathic drugs, most of which made me very ill. Because of this, over time, I have learned how to take better care of myself.

China, is now ruled by a totalitarian, materialistic driven culture and society which is focused on making money and growing an economy. There are reasons for this but they are going to have to deal with the issues that manifest from these ways of looking at things.

China's rivers right now are a cesspool of chemicals and I have pretty much ceased buying any foods imported from China. It was not like this many years ago. It is too bad, since for some time they were a wonderful source for certain types of herbs. It is something that they are beginning to become conscious of - e.g. technological pollution. Do you want an iPod or would you rather have clean rivers to drink from. I rely on local foods nowadays.

There are unintended consequences for everything.

Rich
odenskrigare
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Aug, 2009 11:18 am
@richrf,
richrf;86285 wrote:
When I was young they didn't have that many vaccinations (thank goodness) and the physicians were a little more careful of what they were injecting into new borns. But when I was young I did now and then have some allopathic drugs, most of which made me very ill. Because of this, over time, I have learned how to take better care of myself.


but aren't you glad measles mumps and rubella are a non-issue in the West these days

no thanks to people like you (or porn star Jenna Jameson for that matter)

TCM didn't eradicate these illnesses, Western medicine did

add polio to the list as well

why are you dodging this point rich it's controvertible

richrf;86285 wrote:
China, is now ruled by a totalitarian, materialistic driven culture and society which is focused on making money and growing an economy. There are reasons for this but they are going to have to deal with the issues that manifest from these ways of looking at things.


rich do you think Deng Xiaoping's sentiment "to get rich is glorious" was entirely new?

do you think totalitarian government in China started with the CPC?

you are sorely mistaken

richrf;86285 wrote:
China's rivers right now are a cesspool of chemicals


everything's made out of chemicals, I kind of don't like "chemical" being used pejoratively, I take it you meant "toxic effluents", ok, fair enough, and don't forget air pollution either but, we were talking about measles mumps and rubella which are not caused by effluents but by viri, viri which you must admit have been largely defeated by Western medicine

stop dodging the point!

richrf;86285 wrote:
Do you want an iPod or would you rather have clean rivers to drink from


I don't see how the two are mutually exclusive and I don't want an ipod regardless since I'd get hit by a bus or something

the example of modern northern Europe would seem to suggest that care for the environment does not preclude secularism and rationality

richrf;86285 wrote:
There are unintended consequences for everything


there are unintended consequences for believing metaphysical claptrap too: like a resurgence of measles if ideas like yours take hold
richrf
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Aug, 2009 11:47 am
@odenskrigare,
odenskrigare;86289 wrote:
but aren't you glad measles mumps and rubella are a non-issue in the West these days


I think I have told you enough about my ideas for health. It is way off topic and if you wish to discuss it, I am sure there are proper forums for it.

Now, back to Consciousness.

Rich
0 Replies
 
odenskrigare
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Aug, 2009 11:49 am
@Kielicious,
let the record show that I defeated rich
Pathfinder
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Aug, 2009 06:44 pm
@odenskrigare,
odenskrigare;86305 wrote:
let the record show that I defeated rich


and have you learned anything at all young man? Or do you think you know it all and have nothing more to learn.

The only thing defeated here is your effort to prove yourself. Sorry for the shock to your ego.

many readers of this thread can easily see who is the foolish youngster and who are the minds of great thought and patience.

maybe when you and your biologist cohorts are ready to answer the tough questions we can debate this topic again sometime, but as for now, given that you cannot answer our questions, we must watch you run off without anything else to defend your ideas with.

Let the record show by reading this thread that you biologists could not answer the real question of mind and gave up trying.
0 Replies
 
Shostakovich phil
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Aug, 2009 07:20 pm
@Kielicious,
Kielicious: I respect what you said more than the original thread. The thinking there seems more rational to me.

As for me, I think there is much too much categorical thinking ('Either -- or') in we human beings. We cherish safety in our beliefs. Putting things in vaults and guarding the magic keys we feel we have something no one can steal from us. The same thinking is abundantly obvious in all the rhetoric about mind and brain and the connection here. I see some black and white thinking here where there are no solid proofs and no solid, easy to get at, understanding on the subject. Science is too often looked upon as a God. It has become a religion, replete with all of its own 'high priests' whose feet we bow down and worship. Human beings tend to make 'everything' a religion, because they see in it, this 'safety' and 'understanding' where in fact, there is no real, understanding. No human mind has the capacity to answer the question as to how the mind and brain are connected. Having said that, neuroscientists cannot be discredited. They've uncovered some tremendous things. Suffice it to say, the mind and the brain are connected. Just how they are connected is another matter entirely. The human brain is much too complex for us to ever uncover all of its secrets. That knowledge exists only in the Mind of God. Now, what the hell is the Mind of God? Don't ask me ... I surely don't know. If I did, I would be God. But sadly, I'm not. And if I were to brave an answer ... I would only be running to the safety of categorical, either or thinking. And I refuse to do that. That sort of thinking, I believe, led to Hitler's 'Mein Kamph.' Now how the hell did we get from the mind and body connection to that monster?
Pathfinder
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Aug, 2009 07:35 pm
@Kielicious,
simple, Hitler thought he knew it all too!
richrf
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Aug, 2009 07:39 pm
@Shostakovich phil,
Shostakovich;86747 wrote:
Kielicious: I respect what you said more than the original thread. The thinking there seems more rational to me.

As for me, I think there is much too much categorical thinking ('Either -- or') in we human beings. We cherish safety in our beliefs. Putting things in vaults and guarding the magic keys we feel we have something no one can steal from us. The same thinking is abundantly obvious in all the rhetoric about mind and brain and the connection here. I see some black and white thinking here where there are no solid proofs and no solid, easy to get at, understanding on the subject. Science is too often looked upon as a God. It has become a religion, replete with all of its own 'high priests' whose feet we bow down and worship. Human beings tend to make 'everything' a religion, because they see in it, this 'safety' and 'understanding' where in fact, there is no real, understanding. No human mind has the capacity to answer the question as to how the mind and brain are connected. Having said that, neuroscientists cannot be discredited. They've uncovered some tremendous things. Suffice it to say, the mind and the brain are connected. Just how they are connected is another matter entirely. The human brain is much too complex for us to ever uncover all of its secrets. That knowledge exists only in the Mind of God. Now, what the hell is the Mind of God? Don't ask me ... I surely don't know. If I did, I would be God. But sadly, I'm not. And if I were to brave an answer ... I would only be running to the safety of categorical, either or thinking. And I refuse to do that. That sort of thinking, I believe, led to Hitler's 'Mein Kamph.' Now how the hell did we get from the mind and body connection to that monster?


Yes, I agree. In general people want to have the answer and do not like the idea of uncertainty. For me, it is the other way around. Most everything is uncertain. What will happen the next moment? What just happened? So many things happening all the time, and such a limited sensory apparatus to absorb it all. I am satisfied to just observe and to increase my ability to observe over time. I am not so much in the need of certainty.

Thanks for your comment.

Rich
0 Replies
 
odenskrigare
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Aug, 2009 08:29 pm
@Pathfinder,
Pathfinder;86737 wrote:
and have you learned anything at all young man? Or do you think you know it all and have nothing more to learn


if I thought there were nothing more to learn, I would stop

and don't draw attention to my age: time isn't going backwards and by the time I am your age, I will probably have achieved more than you. certainly, I have already learned how to spell properly. (and, of course, by that time you'll be a carcass)

Pathfinder;86737 wrote:
The only thing defeated here is your effort to prove yourself. Sorry for the shock to your ego


sorry to disappoint you, my ego is as resplendent as ever

Pathfinder;86737 wrote:
many readers of this thread can easily see who is the foolish youngster and who are the minds of great thought and patience


you and richrf are two people: that's not "many"

I mean jesus christ how many people are reading this thread all told? a dozen?

Pathfinder;86737 wrote:
Let the record show by reading this thread that you biologists could not answer the real question of mind and gave up trying.


I never said the hard problem of consciousness didn't exist

I would say however that you don't have answers to it either, and science has done a much better job of pinning down the material aspects of the mind, whether they are part of the story or the whole story

Shostakovich;86747 wrote:
Science is too often looked upon as a God. It has become a religion, replete with all of its own 'high priests' whose feet we bow down and worship.


that's horse****

most people have to be goaded into giving a flying **** about science

Shostakovich;86747 wrote:
The human brain is much too complex for us to ever uncover all of its secrets. That knowledge exists only in the Mind of God. Now, what the hell is the Mind of God? Don't ask me ... I surely don't know


you don't even know whether the mind of God exists and yet you're arrogantly asserting that it does, and that it gives limits to how much we can know about the brain, and spelling it with caps (The Mind of GOD) like it's Y-hw-h

got hypocrisy?

Shostakovich;86747 wrote:
That sort of thinking, I believe, led to Hitler's 'Mein Kamph.' Now how the hell did we get from the mind and body connection to that monster?


I don't know you tell me

I guess one day you'll be studying the effects of temporal lobe lesions on impairment in classifying objects, next thing you know you'll be gassing millions of Jews

... it all happens so fast

Pathfinder;86753 wrote:
simple, Hitler thought he knew it all too!


http://www.codecogs.com/eq.latex?%5Clim_%7Bt%5Crightarrow%5Cinfty%7D%20P%28%5Ctext%7BHitler%20comparison%7D%7C%5Ctext%7Bcontroversial%20topic%7D%29%20=%201
 

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 0.06 seconds on 01/18/2025 at 10:56:11