Belly Bob Posted March 4, 2017 Report Share Posted March 4, 2017 13 hours ago, noonereal said: I am not gonna engage in this... stupidity sorry, I really was trying to get out of this nicely it has just become stupid though. Now that you've slept on it, do you still think that the views that the mind isn't the brain and that numbers aren't brain events are so stupid or unscientific that they're not worth discussing? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belly Bob Posted March 4, 2017 Report Share Posted March 4, 2017 17 hours ago, HawgGoneIt said: I already told them that the mind is nothing more than our earliest learned behavior in combination with our genetic predispositions. Mind/personality/soul are all one and the same imo. They can't really be separated from each other, although they can be separated from their current vessel. Your soul isn't in your heart, or your big toe. Presumably you need a mind before you can learn behavior. So I wouldn't want to identify one's mind with one's earliest learned behavior. And it sounds like your view is that the mind isn't physical since, as you say, it can be separated from it's current vessel, which, I take it, is the brain. I think that NOR thinks that that is a stupid view that isn't worth considering. But he'll correct me if I've put words into his mouth. That's not gator's view either. But I don't think that he'd say that it's a stupid view to hold. He, too, will correct me if I've misspoken on his behalf. And since you seem, in this post, to be trying to agree with NOR's view, maybe I'm misreading you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noonereal Posted March 4, 2017 Report Share Posted March 4, 2017 15 hours ago, Belly Bob said: Chalmers doesn't believe in God. Why would you get that feeling? It was written by a eminent cognitive scientist and published by Oxford UP, the most prestigious publisher in the world. He wouldn't be eminent and he would't get published at Oxford if his argument was "You can't prove me wrong. So I'm right." people need to stop genuflecting at the altar of titles Stephen Hawking was wrong, you have heard me tell the story. I am calling this guy out too. (from what I understand of him, his theory for now) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noonereal Posted March 4, 2017 Report Share Posted March 4, 2017 7 hours ago, Belly Bob said: Presumably you need a mind before you can learn behavior. So I wouldn't want to identify one's mind with one's earliest learned behavior. And it sounds like your view is that the mind isn't physical since, as you say, it can be separated from it's current vessel, which, I take it, is the brain. I think that NOR thinks that that is a stupid view that isn't worth considering. But he'll correct me if I've put words into his mouth. That's not gator's view either. But I don't think that he'd say that it's a stupid view to hold. He, too, will correct me if I've misspoken on his behalf. And since you seem, in this post, to be trying to agree with NOR's view, maybe I'm misreading you. Had a long talk about this last night in the real world. Your view, theory, is still being taught (saddened me) alongside my view. Funny thing was, the student I talked to thought it ridiculous that it was being taught. Obviously that counts for nothing but I did find it interesting that they felt it a waste of class time. I'll know more in a few years but as I have expressed, if a mind exists, we will be able to examine it one day, we have simply not yet harvested the tools to examine/discover it. Same with your soul and your God. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
954gator Posted March 4, 2017 Report Share Posted March 4, 2017 @Belly Bob So I just looked at the video you posted and I wouldn't say he is a dualist. It sounds more like he's stating that we aren't anywhere near understanding the way our experiences relate to our subjectivity. I thought the discussion on subjective and objective was interesting. My opinion is that our subjectivity is still determined by the physical. For example I physically went to STA, The experience is stored in my memory (brain). My brain will make me biased based on this physical experience. So of course STA can beat anyone!! Another different example. Taste and even Color are considered at least partially subjective. I believe our physical processes determine these as well. For example our individual physical differences in our eyes, specifically amount of rods/cones, optic nerve fibers etc are the reason one person might see blue the other might see green (also has to do with how we were first taught these colors and the different specific examples we used when learning the colors.) Even still some might argue color is more objective than subjective. We can measure the specific amount of photons emitted and the wavelength reflected (color shown) is measurable. Only thing subjective is how our different physical "organs" interact with them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawgGoneIt Posted March 4, 2017 Report Share Posted March 4, 2017 8 hours ago, Belly Bob said: Presumably you need a mind before you can learn behavior. So I wouldn't want to identify one's mind with one's earliest learned behavior. And it sounds like your view is that the mind isn't physical since, as you say, it can be separated from it's current vessel, which, I take it, is the brain. I think that NOR thinks that that is a stupid view that isn't worth considering. But he'll correct me if I've put words into his mouth. That's not gator's view either. But I don't think that he'd say that it's a stupid view to hold. He, too, will correct me if I've misspoken on his behalf. And since you seem, in this post, to be trying to agree with NOR's view, maybe I'm misreading you. Well. I think I both agree and disagree with NOR in parts. There is so much yet to be understood that one can't make much more than assumptions as it pertains to this topic as we have come to discuss. If there can be astral projections and other out of body experiences, then obviously, the mind isn't forever locked into this vessel, although in all theories to the like that I have read, remains tethered to this vessel in some form until death of the vessel. What's next after this death is where the real questions reside. Obviously numerous religions attempt to give us explanations, unsatisfactorily imo. I'm most inclined to believe in higher states of consciousness where there is possibly no body required, or where we continue on by making choices depending upon whether we have advanced enough in the universe to be afforded the opportunity/ability/power/whatever, to make a choice. Now, the kicker to that: Are we still 'us' at that point? I don't think we are. I think there could be a 'spiritual metamorphosis' so to speak. Like we don't positively remember our former level of conciousness as we have progressed beyond that. For example; does the butterfly or moth remember life as a caterpillar? Does the caterpillar remember life as an egg? Does the egg remember life as the two parts before fertilization? Do those parts remember the thoughts/functions that led to the fertilization? If the answer to those questions is mostly no, then we leave this old conciousness behind most likely. Seemingly advancing to a higher state. Again, all of this is based on the premise that we(our minds)are energy and energy never ceases to exist, only changes forms. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belly Bob Posted March 4, 2017 Report Share Posted March 4, 2017 54 minutes ago, noonereal said: Stephen Hawking was wrong, you have heard me tell the story. I am calling this guy out too. (from what I understand of him, his theory for now) It would be nice if you came up with a reason at some point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belly Bob Posted March 4, 2017 Report Share Posted March 4, 2017 16 minutes ago, 954gator said: @Belly Bob So I just looked at the video you posted and I wouldn't say he is a dualist. It sounds more like he's stating that we aren't anywhere near understanding the way our experiences relate to our subjectivity. I think he means that our experiences are our subjectivity. So there's no relation there to be explained. Am I confused? How do you understand his claim that the way to solve the Hard Problem is to posit consciousness as a fundamental like space, time, or mass? That sounds pretty dualistic: there are fundamental physical things (like space) and fundamental non-physical things (like consciousness). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECHS05 Posted March 4, 2017 Report Share Posted March 4, 2017 I smeel fecal matter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belly Bob Posted March 4, 2017 Report Share Posted March 4, 2017 1 hour ago, noonereal said: people need to stop genuflecting at the altar of titles I don't think anyone is genuflecting. I'm appealing to expert in the field under discussion. He might be wrong. But the fact that he might be wrong isn't a reason to think that he is wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawgGoneIt Posted March 4, 2017 Report Share Posted March 4, 2017 5 minutes ago, ECHS05 said: I smeel fecal matter. Checked your pants? Your top lip? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belly Bob Posted March 4, 2017 Report Share Posted March 4, 2017 7 minutes ago, ECHS05 said: I smeel fecal matter. Remember to keep wiping until you don't see brown anymore. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawgGoneIt Posted March 4, 2017 Report Share Posted March 4, 2017 Do any of you guys believe that living in certain places can make us more in tune or stronger spiritually? Schumann resonances and the like creating this zones where we become much more in tune with the universe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
954gator Posted March 4, 2017 Report Share Posted March 4, 2017 7 minutes ago, Belly Bob said: I think he means that our experiences are our subjectivity. So there's no relation there to be explained. Am I confused? How do you understand his claim that the way to solve the Hard Problem is to posit consciousness as a fundamental like space, time, or mass? That sounds pretty dualistic: there are fundamental physical things (like space) and fundamental non-physical things (like consciousness). When I watched it I got the impression his idea is that since we cannot understand how our subjective experiences are stored (whether they are physical or non physical) and until we have a better understanding of them, he poses the fundamental mind as separate from what we already know to be physical. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECHS05 Posted March 4, 2017 Report Share Posted March 4, 2017 11 minutes ago, HawgGoneIt said: Checked your pants? Your top lip? Im not wearing pants. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECHS05 Posted March 4, 2017 Report Share Posted March 4, 2017 5 minutes ago, HawgGoneIt said: Do any of you guys believe that living in certain places can make us more in tune or stronger spiritually? Schumann resonances and the like creating this zones where we become much more in tune with the universe. Absolutely. Not necessarily the places, but the people in those places. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noonereal Posted March 4, 2017 Report Share Posted March 4, 2017 30 minutes ago, Belly Bob said: It would be nice if you came up with a reason at some point. LOL, what else can I do but lol we clearly can't communicate Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belly Bob Posted March 4, 2017 Report Share Posted March 4, 2017 17 minutes ago, 954gator said: When I watched it I got the impression his idea is that since we cannot understand how our subjective experiences are stored (whether they are physical or non physical) and until we have a better understanding of them, he poses the fundamental mind as separate from what we already know to be physical. Yeah, that's the impression I got too. And he adds that he doesn't think we will ever be able to explain the existence or nature of consciousness by appealing to brain events. He doesn't arguer for it in the video obviously. But he does argue for that claim in his books and papers. But I guess the point is that he's a dualist, even if he's a dualist just for now (which is what I take you to be saying here), that is, until we figure out how to explain the existence and nature of consciousness by appealing to brain events. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belly Bob Posted March 4, 2017 Report Share Posted March 4, 2017 3 minutes ago, noonereal said: LOL, what else can I do but lol Maybe list your top three arguments or reasons for thinking that the brain is the mind or that numbers are parts of the brain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noonereal Posted March 4, 2017 Report Share Posted March 4, 2017 26 minutes ago, Belly Bob said: I don't think anyone is genuflecting. I'm appealing to expert in the field under discussion. He might be wrong. But the fact that he might be wrong isn't a reason to think that he is wrong. it's no reason to think he's right There is a place for dreamers, this I admit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belly Bob Posted March 4, 2017 Report Share Posted March 4, 2017 2 minutes ago, noonereal said: it's no reason to think he's right I don't see why not. He's a leading expert in his field. That should give us some reason to think that he's got things right with respect to his own field. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noonereal Posted March 4, 2017 Report Share Posted March 4, 2017 4 minutes ago, Belly Bob said: Maybe list your top three arguments or reasons for thinking that the brain is the mind or that numbers are parts of the brain. read the thread and maybe, bake me a cake but not physically... --------------------------------------------------- Because you won't shut up. Did I miss something? Did you ever list your other world theory proofs? All I get from you is I can't prove definitively and that's garbage anyway. For your theory to work magic must be in play. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belly Bob Posted March 4, 2017 Report Share Posted March 4, 2017 24 minutes ago, HawgGoneIt said: Do any of you guys believe that living in certain places can make us more in tune or stronger spiritually? Schumann resonances and the like creating this zones where we become much more in tune with the universe. I don't believe that's true. I guess I don't believe it's false either. It strikes me as implausible though. It's a little hard for me to evaluate about because I'm not sure what you mean by "stronger spiritually" or "more in tune with the universe." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noonereal Posted March 4, 2017 Report Share Posted March 4, 2017 2 minutes ago, Belly Bob said: I don't see why not. He's a leading expert in his field. That should give us some reason to think that he's got things right with respect to his own field. this post is your problem honest no reasoning and this is circular enough, you have nothing, except a philosophy and logical fallacies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawgGoneIt Posted March 4, 2017 Report Share Posted March 4, 2017 19 minutes ago, ECHS05 said: Absolutely. Not necessarily the places, but the people in those places. So certain people can be like tuning forks for these resonances? Maybe it's not that but the people are attracted to these places specifically, so as to seem synonymous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.