Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
MikeL
Social climber
Southern Arizona
|
|
|
Dec 26, 2016 - 02:44pm PT
|
MH2: Our sense organs define and select what we can look for perceptually.
It would appear the brain seems to do that, not sense organs. I think you’re pointing at interpretations.
I do not believe it is my eye that sees a tree.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Dec 26, 2016 - 05:36pm PT
|
from
Heat; A Mode of Motion
John Tyndall
New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1890
p534-535
"In discussing the material combinations which result in the formation of the human organism, it is impossible to avoid taking side glances at the phenomena of consciousness and thought. Science has asked daring questions, and will, no doubt, continue to ask such. Problems will assuredly present themselves to men of a future age, which, if enunciated now, would appear to most people as the direct offspring of insanity. Still, though the progress and development of science may seem to be unlimited, there is a region beyond her reach — a line with which she does not even tend to inosculate. Given the masses and distances of the planets, we can infer the perturbations consequent on their mutual attractions. Given the nature of a disturbance in water, air, or ether, we can infer from the properties of the medium how its particles will be affected. In all this we deal with physical laws, and the mind runs freely along the line which connects the phenomena, from beginning to end. But when we endeavour to pass, by a similar process, from the region of physics to that of thought, we meet a problem not only beyond our present powers, but transcending any conceivable expansion of the powers we now possess. We may think over the subject again and again, but it eludes all intellectual presentation. The origin of the material universe in equally inscrutable. Thus, having exhausted science, and reached its very rim, the real mystery of existence still looms around us. And thus it will ever loom — ever beyond the bourne of man's intellect — giving the poets of successive ages just occasion to declare that
We are such stuff
As dreams are made of, and our little life
Is rounded by a sleep.
Still, presented rightly to the mind, the discoveries and generalisations of modern science constitute a poem more sublime than has ever yet addressed the human imagination. The natural philosopher of to-day may dwell amid conceptions which beggar those of Milton..."
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
|
Dec 26, 2016 - 08:06pm PT
|
I think it goes in both directions, John. We teach from the abstract in most instances after the first few years of education, and then we expect that students will properly apply generalizations to specific situations
That's true, Mike. Even in College Algebra the student learns the abstract technical rules, then hopefully applies them to commonplace situations.
My remark has more to do with the evolution of mathematical thought over the ages.
For Sycorax, here's a teenage poem generated by a computer:
I am
by The Aggregate Kid
i am not i am blown away by a
horrible stranger i fell
into your heart instead of on
the ground, yep it’s true,he’s
my #1 hound friends to the
headbonezone, whenever i’m all alone
looking for a lead.
i hear voices
in my room had a friend, but
he turns his head hung low.
as they wail
and scream in
pain. those who have trusted
someone. may the person you
trust be faithful. is it the
warmth when i’m alone, and to
rule and no
one, no man
will think i dream about what is the
sound of a world god has
created.
there for
me. my
heart when she
gets annoying though
we don’t fist fight she
follows me around
everywhere i go to the skies, angels
adore with loving eyes. when you
grab it, you’ll feel power, bit
by bit.
when you are with someone you
know. i
will not go,
but stay in the sky you arethe one
who i
absoulutly love
he makes a friend
lover or even a lunch in a friend?..
Doesn't get any better than that, does it?
;>)
|
|
MH2
Boulder climber
Andy Cairns
|
|
|
Dec 26, 2016 - 08:19pm PT
|
me: Our sense organs define and select what we can look for perceptually.
MikeL: It would appear the brain seems to do that, not sense organs.
I appreciate your double qualifiers. I was using the word perceptually in the way that a sensory neurophysiologist might. My point is a simple one. You could not see the tree in the dark, but a bat could because of differences in the sense organs. The senses we have do define and select what we can look for perceptually.
I would say that the brain chooses what to attend to. However, the word 'perceive' could also be used for when a stimulus comes to your attention, so I do not say that you are wrong.
There is much information that our senses detect that we are not consciously aware of, but once the senses have picked up the signal the rest of our brain can select what to look for.
|
|
MikeL
Social climber
Southern Arizona
|
|
|
Dec 26, 2016 - 09:21pm PT
|
. . . inosculate . . . .
Thanks.
Wonderful quotes, Ed. Thanks.
MH2:
Thanks.
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 27, 2016 - 04:01am PT
|
I would say that the brain chooses what to attend to. However, the word 'perceive' could also be used for when a stimulus comes to your attention, so I do not say that you are wrong.
Note that this and most other examples are based on a machine or stimulus response model where the organism automatically responds to a stimulus and attention is automatically and mechanically directed to a given qualia or subjective article of perception.
It is when one consciously breaks this auto-response of mechanically generated stimulus - and response to same - that the enormous extent of our mechanical functioning can be witnessed from a POV of NOT responding, and as we say, "leaving the impulse alone without trying to change it or make it go away."
That's when things start to open up beyond machine behavior. Sufism is built on these mechanical pattern interrupts. Few people realize the extent of their mechanical mode of living till awareness to the impulses is "unstuck," or defused in a kind of individuating process akin to early child development, when virtually everything is unconscious and running on autopilot.
|
|
MH2
Boulder climber
Andy Cairns
|
|
|
Dec 27, 2016 - 08:28am PT
|
JL,
I think your difficulty has to do with baggage attached to the words 'machine' and 'mechanical'.
I like what MikeL says:
I’d argue that what the “thing” (a conceit) is, can’t be said. It can be expressed-in-action, though. (I seem to be arguing this point in a number of places around here.) What a thing is and how it shows up in-action are different, but the same. It’s not possible to articulate the archetype, a universal model, a real framework. That’s why language is slippery. It’s only a description, but incomplete at that. Once one divorces themselves from theory and definitions and disciplines, then the words are like colors on a canvas.
Substitute machine for conceit in the above.
There are machines whose behavior cannot even in principle be predicted,
And on the other hand, how do you know that your own behavior is not automatic? Refusing to act on an impulse could be as automatic as responding to the impulse.
|
|
MikeL
Social climber
Southern Arizona
|
|
|
Dec 27, 2016 - 08:35am PT
|
MH2: And on the other hand, how do you know that your own behavior is not automatic?
:-)
|
|
Bushman
climber
The state of quantum flux
|
|
|
Dec 27, 2016 - 08:54am PT
|
That's when things start to open up beyond machine behavior. Sufism is built on these mechanical pattern interrupts. Few people realize the extent of their mechanical mode of living till awareness to the impulses is "unstuck," or defused in a kind of individuating process akin to early child development, when virtually everything is unconscious and running on autopilot.
Estranged from all things Spiritual
Being raised on religion and science (the Nazarene Church and the the California public school system), religion was my primary belief system (nurture & comfort) and science was my backup belief system (logic & reason). At the age of twelve, religion traumatically became no longer nurturing or comforting to me. In my need to find an explanation for upheavals in my family life and core belief system, I tried to hold on to various spiritual beliefs for many years.
It was only after the recent loss of a close family member followed the catastrophic illness of my spouse that I finally saw the merit (IMO) of choosing to rely solely upon science to explain the known, and to look to the future of science to explain the unknown. Sufism, spirituality, metaphysics; they have no place is my world view or my understanding of consciousness, cognizance, or any kind of subconscious psychological workings of the brain.
Meditation, upon occasion, has been a solely therapeutic exercise for me, but has never revealed to me any portals to the soul or the metaphysical idea of the 'mind' as is discussed in this thread. Perhaps if I were to undergo another dramatic psychological upheaval as I have experienced on more than one occasion in my life, I might once again become more receptive to the idea of believing in something spiritual. Obviously, this is not something one would normally desire or wish for, and I would prefer to avoid any such experiences.
In the interim I shall remain a soulless, atheist anarchist. Perhaps Werner might chime in here and point out my cluelessness, to which I would probably have no response.
-bushman
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Dec 27, 2016 - 09:38am PT
|
if you had turned away and reported that house to us here, we would believe your "testimony" of having witnessed this scene...
in that case you would have reported your subjective observation (as it is unlikely that many others would have had the same response to the stimuli you had upon seeing "the house.")
so it starts a process... were it interesting, others would have gone out and looked for themselves... and you could then start the conversation about what you saw vs. what they saw... who was right, who wrong?
and you too could have gone back and looked again, and even in identical conditions you might not confirm your own initial "vision."
Lacking any understanding of this, what might you conclude?
In a physical model of perception, for instance in the functioning of neural networks, many neurons "vote" on the stimuli and the majority determine your response... its statistical... so there are outliers, etc... but in the end the process results in a pretty good answer, meaning that such networks tend to convey advantage to the individual and the species over the long haul (also a statistical statement).
Though there is obvious bias, and often the answer is "wrong," you saw a house where there was none.
A group of human "voters" can also go through a similar process, often coming to a better result than a single human judgement, but the possibility of getting something "wrong" is there too.
MikeL has been pointing this out for all groups of humans, including scientists, that the consensus view is not immune to such biases. Yet, interestingly, there doesn't seem to be a "better" way. That is because there is no such judge of "better or worse" in our physical view of the universe.
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
|
Dec 28, 2016 - 04:19pm PT
|
On a number of occasions I have caught a glimpse of something out of the corner of my eye and thought it to be a bear or a human, only to find it was a tree stump. The mind always tries to interpret and accommodate, demonstrating the probabilistic nature of perception. The same thing happens conceptually to mathematicians from time to time when they feel their "proof" is adequate, only to review it the next day and find glaring flaws - things that seem so obvious. The mind tries so hard!
|
|
MH2
Boulder climber
Andy Cairns
|
|
|
Dec 28, 2016 - 05:16pm PT
|
The mind tries so hard!
Nothing ventured, nothing gained.
Though I've seen the occasional exception.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Dec 28, 2016 - 08:21pm PT
|
I said this years ago here that the mind and consciousness is faster than the speed of light.
Unfortunately the gross materialists are so locked into their narrow minded sterile world and suppress all except their limited little worldly view
which is no better than "their own flat earth knowledge" masquerading as science .......
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 29, 2016 - 01:28am PT
|
Refusing to act on an impulse could be as automatic as responding to the impulse.
---
You're still considering all of this from a stimulus response or machine model, imagining that I am somehow "struggling" to "get" that machine registration and sentient awareness are not selfsame, that machines are so powerful (per data processing) that what they Do is now beyond predictions. But this in no ways is even one step toward sentience because no amount of content or processing will ever be the same as being aware of that content. Believing otherwise is IME the blind sport afforded by a staunch 3rd person POV of mind. The observer independent model allows only to see and frame things consistent with that model. How can it be otherwise?
But there is still hope...
Try and imagine being where there is no "refusal" to act, and no automatic response to act either, both which require effort or action, even negative action The way you have it - a common miscue with early meditation students - is that abandoning all effort is in fact a kind of negative act or procedure or function that a machine could impose on itself. Not at all. In actual practice no-mind meditation is the radical allowing of the brain to do whatever it wants to do, automatically, totally on auto-pilot, while the aware subject makes no effort to change, alter, influence, or to move toward or away from whatever the brain is doing.
Trying NOT to do an automatic brain task or function is what leads beginning meditation students to attempt to "not think," strenuously efforting to squash thought, to hold it off with willpower or some technique - a tactic that never works, and also requires crazy effort.
Imagine stepping totally out of the mechanical acting or refusing to act cycle, where you get right down to the ground in which all automatic happenings occur and where observing same can be experienced as categorically different and prior to the acting/refusing to act merry go round.
More on this later, but understand that this cannot be grasped from a 3rd person perspective. A possible worm hole in for you might be to review what you said:
There are machines whose behavior cannot even in principle be predicted....
Look at the words "behavior" and "predicted." Simply note that both pertain to DOING something, some action, function, act or behavior that can be witnessed or measured from the outside, some result or response that we can grasp with our sense organs or measure by some means or at any rate describe as something we are DOING or NOT DOING. That is not it.
And DMT (wonderful post) and Ed, what you both are talking about is content, stuff that appears in our field of awareness. In my experience, the real shift occurs when awareness itself is finally experienced as basic, NOT the content, which will always be open to various interpretations.
There is a lot to be said per peer review, to what thousands of people say about something over hundreds of years. There is also something to be said for Honest Abe's words that you cannot fool all the people all the time.
|
|
MH2
Boulder climber
Andy Cairns
|
|
|
Dec 29, 2016 - 06:51am PT
|
JL,
As in DMT's story, your brain molds what it finds into patterns it is familiar with.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Dec 29, 2016 - 07:54am PT
|
your brain molds what it finds into patterns it is familiar with.
That's why you can't trust the mind ever.
That's why meditation is so important.
But meditation has to be done correctly otherwise you're just fooling yourselves even more .......
|
|
MikeL
Social climber
Southern Arizona
|
|
|
Dec 29, 2016 - 08:11am PT
|
^^^^^^^
The Force is strong with this one.
|
|
MH2
Boulder climber
Andy Cairns
|
|
|
Dec 29, 2016 - 09:54am PT
|
^^^
My opinion, too, but don't trust it.
|
|
i-b-goB
Social climber
Wise Acres
|
|
|
Dec 29, 2016 - 11:03am PT
|
Absolute Trust
by Henry M. Morris, Ph.D.
“Though he slay me, yet will I trust in him: but I will maintain mine own ways before him. He also shall be my salvation: for an hypocrite shall not come before him.” (Job 13:15-16)
The patriarch Job was, according to God’s own testimony, the most perfect and upright man in all the earth (Job 1:8), yet he was subjected to the most severe testings that anyone (except Christ Himself) ever had to endure. He lost all his great possessions and his large family in a single day, then was afflicted for months on end with a most loathsome and painful disease. He lost the respect of all who had once honored and followed him, and was even accused by his closest friends of being a wicked sinner and arrogant hypocrite. Worst of all, the God whom he had loved and faithfully served all his life had apparently completely ignored his prayers for deliverance or even for understanding of what was happening to him. Finally, a presumptuous young religionist related what he (falsely) claimed was a divine message that even God had accused Job of sin and hypocrisy.
Yet, despite all this, Job never once lost his faith! “Though he slay me, yet will I trust in him,” he insisted. “For I know that my redeemer liveth” (Job 19:25), and “he also shall be my salvation” (today’s verse).
What an example has been provided us by this ancient patriarch, whose knowledge of God’s Word, God’s love, and God’s great salvation through faith in Christ was only a small fraction of what we know now, with God’s complete revelation before us. The apostle James well reminds us of “the patience of Job,” probably the greatest example of all “the prophets, who have spoken in the name of the Lord, for an example of suffering affliction, and of patience” (James 5:10-11). We can, like Job, know that He who created us deserves absolute trust. HMM http://www.icr.org/article/9681/
...we don't have to know everything to get it!
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!