Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
BASE104
Social climber
An Oil Field
|
|
|
Nov 26, 2015 - 09:26am PT
|
It's like Ed saying I was "at least" being consistent in my observations, as opposed to them being actually true. Ed, we must conclude, reserves conclusions about what is and is not true to measuring alone.
Then why in hell do you take him on about physics? Why do you go so far as to have your carpool write posts for you about physics? How is physics even important to you, John?
When you have done that, John, you totally lose me. I don't know what is your idea or what is another's. This might not mean much to you, but it is important. You should, when using a source, attribute it or put it in quotes. I do that when pilfering from Wiki.
Attribution of ideas is important. If you don't do that on a college homework assignment, you can be kicked out of college for it.
It just makes you look foolish, John, and I wouldn't be surprised if Gill agreed with me. It has gotten downright funny sometimes, seeing you post on deep physics matters which you don't understand. Of course, we now all assume that it comes from your carpool, even when you don't attribute it to them.
Hilbert Space....HAH!
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Nov 26, 2015 - 09:45am PT
|
We all are trying to make sense of the world with very limited set of tools (senses and brain).
Yes, just dead hardware!
Then you should load some firmware in there (consciousness) and boot it up and you'll quickly start seeing beyond the limits .....
|
|
MH2
Boulder climber
Andy Cairns
|
|
|
Nov 26, 2015 - 10:15am PT
|
you directly imply that the truth is something other than the "opinions" I have provided
I can easily correct that. The truth could be exactly the opinions you hold.
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
|
Nov 26, 2015 - 10:55am PT
|
. . . so the cogent study of mind itself (NOT objective functioning) begins with qualia, awareness, attention, and focus, the cornerstones of mind or first person experience itself (JL)
I think this is indeed a legitimate approach to studying the practice of mind. However, to study the essence of mind takes a combination of the objective and subjective approaches.
As for JL's attachment to Hilbert spaces, quantum fields, virtual particles, etc., I think he is attempting the combined approach mentioned above. Maybe not.
I have great difficulty, myself, understanding some of the math physicists employ in these arcane areas of investigation, even above and beyond the notational differences. I'm trying to come to grips with functional integration which is largely an invention of physicists, particularly Feynmann. His discussion of light in QED is transparent, adding vectors in essence, but placing that simple idea in the context of path integrals is not easy for me to work through. Probably due to my age and background in the more traditional world of classical complex analysis and infinite processes. I think I'll have to invent my own functional integral in an entirely different context to really get a grip on it. It's probably a breeze for rgold and yanqui!
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
|
Nov 27, 2015 - 07:47pm PT
|
PP, this is my favorite post you've written;
But what JL is pointing at is there is a subtly to experience that is before discursive mind that can be looked into with intense curiosity ("the experiential adventures" ) that I think are looked down upon by some ,naively so as woo etc. by the "I love science, secular, banner waving crowd" as if to look closely at your experience was anti science (it is not). Too look closely without quantifying is probably what seems strange or nonsensical to scientists.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Nov 27, 2015 - 08:26pm PT
|
By Ed has done enough mind examination by now that I trust he knows enough not to claim his mind can fully focus on two things concurrently and that directed discursive thinking is entirely possible sans narrow focusing.
well, I'm not sure, because I have had experiences where I was focussing on two things at once, simultaneously...
I distinctly recall lecturing a graduate class in classical mechanics, we were going through the normal complicated stuff on legrangians or some such, but as I was lecturing, I was also thinking about an entirely different physics problem quite distinct from the lecture.
This seemed to work out, and I was a little surprised at the ability to "focus on two things concurrently" totally in my "discursive mind."
So I was engaged enough in the class to be giving a lecture on some difficult material, following my notes, writing on the black-board (these were pre-PowerPoint days) and at the same time working on some other physics theory.
That was my experience. I suspect that there are situations where I could reproduce that experience. I would seem to contradict Largo's assertion that it was not possible. It is possible, and I experienced it.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Nov 27, 2015 - 08:44pm PT
|
Later, after gorging on the bird, I'd like to take up the equally wonky belief that "mind' can be fully known understood through a thorough investigation of objective functioning.
I consider this wild claim not only as the dark side of scientism (insinuation that the only viable knowledge arises from quantification of objective functioning), but as an approach that has resulted in nothing whatsoever per the study of mind or consciousness, focusing as it does on data processing. Put differently, one has to know what is involved to know what to investigate.
Sentience, consciousness and "mind" are not themselves molecular nor yet strictly biological phenomenon (remember, as Chalmers, Harris and many others have clearly pointed out, mind is not reductive to biology), so the cogent study of mind itself (NOT objective functioning) begins with qualia, awareness, attention, and focus, the cornerstones of mind/first person experience itself.
As far as I understand, no one has come close to proving in any way that "mind" is not a strictly biological phenomenon. If they have, please point to the literature.
Is there any current example of mind existing independently of a biological system? No, there is not.
So it is not such a speculation to look for a biological explanation for mind, it is, in fact, entirely logical to look there for such an explanation. And it is highly likely that such an explanation will be found there.
There is no philosophically certain arguments regarding mind, that is for sure, but fortunately we do not depend on philosophical foundations for doing good science. Science itself is not understood by philosophers, but science exists and is practiced at a very high level, all without the philosophical certainty of its validity.
"Just eat the steak"
It is entirely possible that what we experience as "mind" is yet another perception, that hasn't much to do with what mind actually is... just what we perceive it to be. Our perceptions are notoriously approximate... providing a good model for what is happening, but doing it in that quite lovable patchwork way we find in all biological systems.
Saying that science can not be used to successfully explain mind is a real stretch, and it is an opinion based on no real argument, scientific or philosophical. Whether or not this is a solvable problem really has to do with the empirical process, a process we cannot foresee the conclusion of...
Many more centuries of philosophy than of science have been at this, and philosophy has little to show for the effort. Even the problems framed by the philosophical arguments might be totally irrelevant to the answer.
Science has produced a number of models, many of which have been shown, by science, to be inadequate to explain the phenomenon, though many have had good success in explaining parts of the phenomenon.
I do agree that we will never be able to explain what goes on in Largo's mind, and while that is the most important question for Largo, it probably isn't very relevant for the science.
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
|
Nov 27, 2015 - 08:51pm PT
|
^^^i guess, i too. i'm almost always simultanously building a house while thinking of what climb i wish i were on.. gooble,gooble.
Happy Thanksgiv'in!
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
|
Nov 27, 2015 - 08:57pm PT
|
There is no philosophically certain arguments regarding mind, that is for sure, but fortunately we do not depend on philosophical foundations for doing good science.
i've always thought most good science starts out philosophically?
but i'm just a turkey
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Nov 27, 2015 - 09:57pm PT
|
Nobody says "I mind"
They say "My mind"
Nobody says "I body" or "I car"
But everyone says "My mind" and "My car"
The definition of "my" is saying something belongs to you.
But it is NOT YOU.
Thus the knower of the material body is not the body nor the mind .....
|
|
TomCochrane
Trad climber
Santa Cruz Mountains and Monterey Bay
|
|
|
Nov 27, 2015 - 11:22pm PT
|
some scientists are stuck with the unfounded assumption that the mind stops when the meat body stops
this is a convenient assumption for the controllers and thus heavily supported politically and financially
however there is abundant empirical science and philosophical practice disproving this assumption
every scientist will eventually be provided with experiences to test this assumption for themselves
|
|
TomCochrane
Trad climber
Santa Cruz Mountains and Monterey Bay
|
|
|
Nov 28, 2015 - 12:20am PT
|
well if you take a scientist who all his life denies the possibility of skiing and then much later transport him to the top of a ski hill, the demonstration of results might not be impressive
perhaps you would get a better demonstration by talking to an actual skier
|
|
Bushman
Social climber
Elk Grove, California
|
|
|
Nov 28, 2015 - 09:03am PT
|
Nobody says "I mind"
They say "My mind"
Nobody says "I body" or "I car"
But everyone says "My mind" and "My car"
The definition of "my" is saying something belongs to you.
But it is NOT YOU.
Thus the knower of the material body is not the body nor the mind .....
True Werner, and inspirational.
The Batman Strikes Again
One morning I found the Batman
sleeping in 'my' car
Surrounded by some baggage and
a beat up old guitar
I nudged his shoulder gently
with the tip of a crowbar
And he asked about the woman that
he'd brought back from the bar
I left quietly for coffee and
some pastry for the dude
And left him there to sleep it off
and give some latitude
At any rate the situation
in the interlude
Required of me that I provide
the man some fortitude
When I came back he stood there with
a razor to his face
Dry shaving in the side mirror
a grimace on his face
He thanked me for the coffee and
I left to give him space
'Twasn't often that a Batman ever
shows up at your place
I strolled across the park and fed
some pastry to a bird
And stared at a cathedral of whose beauty
'twas no word
And pondered that a Batman ever'd
chance upon this nerd
Coming face to face with fiction was
like nothing I had heard
So I set my jaw to speak to him
and turned upon my heel
For interviewing Batman might
lead to a better deal
So rare the opportunity such good
fortune I could feel
Right then I watched 'my' car go by
with Batman at the wheel
-bushman
11/27/2015
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Nov 28, 2015 - 10:34am PT
|
some scientists are stuck with the unfounded assumption that the mind stops when the meat body stops
not sure why this is an "unfounded assumption"
while there is a tradition of the "life force" being a separate entity that animates the material of the body, and that that "life force" may have an existence independent of the body, there is no physical evidence for such an entity. The search for and measurements of the "life force" and of the body with and without the "life force" have tested the assumption, and to the limits of our measurements have found the assumption to be consistent with the measurements.
the standard reply to this is to say that there are things (or no-things) that aren't measurable BUT STILL HAVE a physical influence (the failed logic of that is apparent, but also ignored).
one has only to look at measurements such as the erasure of "information" (what is "information?" is it physical? is it a thing?) to see that things/no-things we consider to be non-physical have a physically measurable presence.
it is easy to say that science has no experience with these ideas, but upon closer consideration these claims are shown to be false.
presuming that ancient explanations are somehow more pertinent to the explanation of these mysteries than the more modern understanding is simply untenable.
"ancient wisdom" has no claim of priority, or superiority, in these domains.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Nov 28, 2015 - 10:45am PT
|
there is no physical evidence for such an entity
Yes this is true for the living entity itself is not physical.
"Modern materialistic Science" has no claim of priority, or superiority, in these domains.
|
|
Bushman
Social climber
Elk Grove, California
|
|
|
Nov 28, 2015 - 11:21am PT
|
Ya'll might do with a bit less
"Post Ghosties, the new Breakfast Ethereal!"
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Nov 28, 2015 - 11:59am PT
|
some scientists are stuck with the unfounded assumption that the mind stops when the meat body stops
Nothing 'unfounded' about it.
this is a convenient assumption for the controllers and thus heavily supported politically and financially
Too quote the master: complete and utter crankloon. The opposite is actually true - the 'controllers' are entirely dependent on hustling fear and a magnificent hereafter to the sheep.
however there is abundant empirical science and philosophical practice disproving this assumption
Well, I see plenty of whitespace just below my cursor and a master of the keyboard such as yourself is no doubt familiar with the concept of a 'list' - I suggest you get busy with one in this last regard.
|
|
Ward Trotter
Trad climber
|
|
|
Nov 28, 2015 - 02:34pm PT
|
some scientists are stuck with the unfounded assumption that the mind stops when the meat body stops
Very imprecise scientists you mean. Most scientists and informed laymen should know the brain/mind discharges infrared as a result of metabolic activity. If you touch someone's skull you can feel the heat. Whereas this heat is not the mind per se, it is nevertheless caused by the mind at work within the brain.
"Meat body" is an interestingly derogatory term, is it not? I have some meat in my refrigerator but it lacks a DC current and refuses to log on to supertopo all on its on. This bad boy (moi) must first consume it and convert its constituents into neurons, etc.,to help get that process going.
Looking south towards Ryan Mountain, Saddle Rocks ,etc., this past Tuesday, at the base of Houser Buttress where Loose Lady begins.
Note the "pot holder" on the rock in foreground where the elements have eroded a slit to allow sliver of light.
|
|
paul roehl
Boulder climber
california
|
|
|
Nov 28, 2015 - 02:49pm PT
|
The fact remains that science hasn't a clue as to what constitutes conscious thought. What is pain for instance? Oh yes it's reflected in activation of certain parts of the brain and we can measure that activity with some accuracy... but what is it? We all know it intimately, we can imagine it as experience, but that feeling is beyond mere brain structure as endured deeply personal experience. That lack of knowledge (that is what is the experience of pain?) so far removed from any real understanding creates an open door of speculation in which declarations of scientific certainty seem disingenuous at best.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!