Are Humans an Equation?

The more I look into human psychology and how the brain works, the more I believe that we are an equation simply playing itself out. The bases for why I believe this is because nothing in the mind is random, any thought or action has a source. If you think of a random number, it may appear random, but it has a source. It reminds me of when I used to program in my free time. There are several ways to create a 'random' integer in a program, however, all methods derive the number from something, ie the time on the computer, date, or some other number on the computer. It does this because it is impossible to pick a number from nothing. Similarly, it is impossible for us to create a thought from nothing. This is where variables come into play. For the human mind, the variables are limitless. Variables that affect the human equation range from one's belief system to how hot it is in the room. Everything affecting how we think and act.

So I'm sure many of you are thinking why is any of this important. I believe it's important because our perspective of life is not what it should be. If we saw things for how they truly are, then no one would be mad at someone else for living out their equation, they would simply try to change the variables for a more favorable outcome.

Thoughts?

I get where your going, but probably the mind exists outside the brain. I believe that the brain is just a receiver, so how would that affect your thoughts.

Humans will be stll a long way of understanding it though. If you took one sentence from my brain in my life, it would take you all your life and more to understand that sentence, and its meaning.

Originally posted by andy1033
I get where your going, but probably the mind exists outside the brain. I believe that the brain is just a receiver, so how would that affect your thoughts.

Even if the brain is a receiver (never heard of that one), it does not affect my argument. Try to form a thought with absolutely no source. It can't be done. We are more like computer programs than we would like to admit. When artificial intelligence is created, in a sense it will be no more artificial than we are.

reply to post by TruthParadox



we tap into a pool of energies interesting when you meet and have a conversation with someone whom has had the same random thoughts or would that be a confirmation of your own thoughts

Kierkegaard said that truth is subjectivity and I have always taken that to mean that the only truth that matters is the one that means enough to you that you live by it. Though I suspect that with enough effort and time and a level of genius no one quite seems to have that the human mind could indeed be represented by an equation - it has no significance to me. When I walk in the door of my house after a long day at work and my daughter runs up and hugs my legs and says she missed me - I don't care if anyone could calculate that. It feels just fine to me and that is enough.

As for people looking for ultimate absolute truth - remember Jack Nicholson in "A Few Good Men"........."You can't handle the truth!!!"

I think the brain is more like a converter. We know it receives signals and has electrical patterns/waves etc. The question everyone seems to be too scared to ask is - to whom/what are things being sent too.

Are we the equation? I don't think so. I think instead we are more like the processors of equations. An equations is nothing until it is processed.

reply to post by total_slacker


I agree. It shouldn't really make a difference either way. It's like if you were to eat rat meat but didn't know it was rat meat, most people would be better off not knowing the truth. I don't see it like this however, I see it as an oppurtunity. Because I know that certain variables change the mind, and that certain emotions portrayed by the mind change the situation, I can use this to my advantage. Change the variables, and you change your circumstance. Though of course this is obvious to anyone, things become far more obvious once you KNOW and understand. You can tell someone not to do drugs a thousand times, but they will not understand until they have a bad experience from drugs.

Originally posted by TruthParadox
reply to post by total_slacker

 

I agree. It shouldn't really make a difference either way. It's like if you were to eat rat meat but didn't know it was rat meat, most people would be better off not knowing the truth. I don't see it like this however, I see it as an oppurtunity. Because I know that certain variables change the mind, and that certain emotions portrayed by the mind change the situation, I can use this to my advantage. Change the variables, and you change your circumstance. Though of course this is obvious to anyone, things become far more obvious once you KNOW and understand. You can tell someone not to do drugs a thousand times, but they will not understand until they have a bad experience from drugs.

But if the person is ok with eating the rat, and has no problem with eating the rat when he doesn't know it's a rat. Then knowing it doesn't change the reality of it. For him to be upset is simply based on a previous bit of false information that created a bias. The only one at true benefit would be the person giving false information as they are gaining more money for something else. Essentially ripping off the person.

This is like red pill/blue pill question really. And the only reason to want to ignore the truth is if the truth is already known to be worse. In which case, why hide it?

Also, your point about drugs is the same philosophy behind Genesis and the apple. Where adam and eve eat the apple and thus learn both good and evil. Obviously to "know" good is not the same as understanding it.

I think philosophy is the equation and we merely play those philosophies out, and thus the material/image is the variable.