What makes Us, Us?

@rosborne979,

rosborne979 wrote:

Re: What makes Us, Us?

extra medium wrote:
What makes us, us? What keeps you the same person, in spite of all your atoms being replaced? If all the atoms in our bodies have been replaced, what is the common thread that keeps us, us?

Memory. It is the intangible thread which transcends the exchange of atoms and the discharge of neurons. Our ability to remember what we thought we were, makes us what we are.

So if someone has amnesia he is no longer who he was? Who is he, then?

0 Replies

@Fil Albuquerque,

Fil Albuquerque wrote:

...I suppose those (proteins, hormones ..etc) need atoms don´t they ?

Yes indeed, but looking at it in such way is nonsens. It would be the same as talking about the atoms laying a brick wall, the structure of the atoms in each brick has very little meaning to the overall structure and process.

If you spoke about atoms to any neuroscientist, surgeon or whatever in the medical area, he would laugh you in your face.

1 Reply

@HexHammer,

I suppose so... but for the continuum hypothesis it makes sense addressing atoms...

1 Reply

@Fil Albuquerque,

It has no practical meaning. It's only a beautiful misleading/delusive metaphor, making sense in a rethorical universe, also observed in communist countries ..especially back in the 80'ies where propaganda would delute naive people with empty rethorics.

1 Reply

@HexHammer,

What in the hell are you talking about ???

1 Reply

@Fil Albuquerque,

Fil Albuquerque wrote:

What in the hell are you talking about ???

The underlying principles and mechanics that is the basis of our discussion, how we precive and rationalize things.

What most misses in science discussion is rationallity and psycology, those things are often scorned and considerd a totally seperate thing, when it's should be considerd into any kind of discussion, be it any scientific discussion.

When I see people babbeling about "can you prove you exist" then I won't really waste my breath engaging in the discussion in itself, but point out that people speculating about such things, often lack rationallity and the topic is idiotic.

1 Reply

@HexHammer,

Sorry, i'm new to this, so i really don't know how to quote Smile

"What most misses in science discussion is rationallity and psycology, those things are often scorned and considerd a totally seperate thing, when it's should be considerd into any kind of discussion, be it any scientific discussion."
i agree that there isn't psychology in Science, however it is not necessary to have it, because Science is rational, and that's more than enough to knock sense in people. take mathematics for example. first they form definitions (strong rigid structures, fundamentals), then they make 'mathematical leaps' and prove those leaps using definitions and the result? a theorem. then we propose more ideas and prove them once again with old verities. etc. etc. etc...
the concept here is to create jumps small enough (in a practical point of view) so that understanding and satisfaction is achieved. hence rationality will be observed.

1 Reply

@Etude,

Etude wrote:

i agree that there isn't psychology in Science, however it is not necessary to have it, because Science is rational, and that's more than enough to knock sense in people. take mathematics for example. first they form definitions (strong rigid structures, fundamentals), then they make 'mathematical leaps' and prove those leaps using definitions and the result? a theorem. then we propose more ideas and prove them once again with old verities. etc. etc. etc...
the concept here is to create jumps small enough (in a practical point of view) so that understanding and satisfaction is achieved. hence rationality will be observed.

I hope ur joking.
I'v heard too many plain idiots claim "numbers doesn't lie" it's commonly know that spindoctors uses statistics to mislead, the last boss I worked under, looked at the economy numbers and for years said "the company is strong" we are growing ..and bla bla..
While I claimed we are extremely weak, the company is delapitated, you have totally incompetent leaders all over the place, when I left I foretold him a terrible phropecy, "your expantion in Europe will fail, your internet will fail, and you will fail". He was top 30 ritches men in Denmark 10 years ago, now have a huge debt.

I had this discussion with a biochemist and her PETA crusade, that medical industries could use certain bio samples to test their products, while I as a Mtv and computergame dude could answer, "no, such thingies can't test neurological things".

All kind of science are used by humans and most often end up being used by humans, who can become complacent, mentally ill, get alzenheimer, be incompetent ..etc, which is why psycology could also be considerd in the equation.

Just look at Alfred Noble how naive he was, inventing the dynamite with the intention of ending all wars with this terrible remedy.

The list goes on..

1 Reply

@extra medium,

extra medium wrote:

Every year about 98% of the atoms in your body are replaced.

Thus, within a few years from now, all the current atoms in your body will have been replaced. Yet you will still be the same you.

Looking a few years into the past, none of the atoms that now make up your body were present.

Yet, you are still you. (or are you?)

What makes us, us? What keeps you the same person, in spite of all your atoms being replaced? If all the atoms in our bodies have been replaced, what is the common thread that keeps us, us? Is this "proof" of a soul-like entity?

If it doesn't prove that a soul exists, it appears to prove, at the very least, that "we are not our bodies." What is this common thread, this thing animating our bodies of ever-changing atoms? Discuss?

life energy

which is an entirely different energy from physics energy

1 Reply

@north,

What type of energy is "life energy" exactly?

1 Reply

@HexHammer,

oh i see... you're talking about the application of science. then i totally agree with you. in addition to psychology, there must also be economics. i was refering to pure intellectual information formed by symbols, formulae, numbers etc.

1 Reply

@Etude,

Etude wrote:

oh i see... you're talking about the application of science. then i totally agree with you. in addition to psychology, there must also be economics. i was refering to pure intellectual information formed by symbols, formulae, numbers etc.

Still I must disagree, if we could formulate things into symbols, forulae and numbers, computers wouldn't need humans but only needed a camera and arms, then could build itself greater robots and androids, in the end outdate humans, in between all these symbols, formulate and numbers, human intellect, rationallity and ability of recognition must be applied, else by itself it wold be taken too literaly and end up in chaos.

1 Reply

@HexHammer,

HexHammer wrote:

Still I must disagree, if we could formulate things into symbols, forulae and numbers, computers wouldn't need humans but only needed a camera and arms, then could build itself greater robots and androids, in the end outdate humans, in between all these symbols, formulate and numbers, human intellect, rationallity and ability of recognition must be applied, else by itself it wold be taken too literaly and end up in chaos.

okay first of all, we are really off topic here. sorry to the person who created this discussion
secondly, i don't think computers can build 'greater' forms of themselves simply by having arms and legs. no. it only has limited knowledge that it can apply, because what differs us from computers is the ability to generate random quantities. (random numbers in computers aren't made randomly, it's a program based on eg. the speed, orientation of the mouse) also we can imagine things, if not albert einstein wouldn't be who he is today. computers can only perform tasks at a greater speed and sophistication compared to an average human being being.
lastly, you are still talking about the applying the science. if we don't take the theory literally, things would definitely end up in chaos. interpreting, making inferences and deductions requires the things you said, but creating the data to be interpreted, inferred and deduced requires a cold hard literary approach - a task meant for computers.

1 Reply

@Etude,

Don't really see where these random numbers comes into any scientific genere.

1 Reply

@HexHammer,

random numbers are important in statistics. anyway, the main point is that theoretical science requires a literal approach as oppose to applying the science in real life situations where it's necessary to have psychology and economics.

1 Reply

@Etude,

Etude wrote:

random numbers are important in statistics. anyway, the main point is that theoretical science requires a literal approach as oppose to applying the science in real life situations where it's necessary to have psychology and economics.

No, those numbers doesn't just appear random, they are actually very accurately, but with some uncertainty to it.
If it were truly random they would have a likely hood of being anywhere from 0 - to infinity, which they are not, but lies within a limited margin.

1 Reply

@HexHammer,

so you are saying that rolling a die that produces a number is not truly random because it only has the limited margin 1-6? that is not true. randomness, or stochastic data can happen anywhere.
i'm studying actuarial science, so statistics is my major. the data has to be random in order to make unbiased inferences which helps to produce expected values and probabilities.

3 Replies

@Etude,

Then ur good books need to be updated, there are gamblings books that isn't scientific but has better understanding of the scientific randomness, you can't roll 6, 100 times in a row, that would statisticly impossible, in your statistic you should know everything (almost) has a cause, and only if that cause will change your result will fluxuate in the direction of event.

The die will produce results according to laws of limited randomness (can't remember the excat name).

The this year there might be a statistic of X rapes, the next year it won't suddenly explode with a factor of 1000 or fall with a factor of 1000, it will fluxuate within a margin out of randomness.
In Denmark back in the 60'ies (IIRC) porn would be legalised thus the rape rate would drasticly fall with about 40% that year alone.

0 Replies

@Etude,

I would have to say that you are correct about the die and Hex is right about the rape cases even though you probably know this as well!
But who am I to know what is correct as all I have to offer is what little knowledge that I think I have?

0 Replies

@rosborne979,

rosborne979 wrote:

What type of energy is "life energy" exactly?

that which is given off by life , of which is entirely different from the quantum , atomic , molecular energy of non-living things

0 Replies

What makes Us, Us?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know