It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Determinism?

page: 3
4
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 10:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by sirnex

You are confusing the sensation for the perception.

The biological processes create the experience but not that which experiences.


OK, describe the difference between the experience of pain and the perception of pain. Should be a fun thing.


The experience of pain is created by the transmission of information from the external world to the brain.

The perception of pain is an abstract concept to describe our consciousness responding to this information.


Originally posted by sirnex

The brain is the receiver.

Really? Exactly how does it "receive" consciousness? Where does it come from? How is it transmitted?


This is the logical conclusion of comprehending the fundamental nature of consciousness as distinct from the the synthesis of information that is the human brain. The brain creates what is experienced not that which experiences.

Your questions are interesting but unnecessary to comprehend that consciousness is not a byproduct of synthesizing information.


Originally posted by sirnex
Really now? Can we just be the slightest bit honest here instead of emptily and arbitrarily exclaiming utter baseless garbage?



edit on 25-6-2011 by Jezus because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 10:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by EthanT
No, we don't. We don't even have a viable model on how consciousness works, let alone evidence to back that model up.


Consciousness is just an abstract concept.

There is no scientific evidence that consciousness even exists.

You can not scientifically prove to anyone that you have consciousness.
You can not scientifically prove to yourself that anyone else has consciousness.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 10:36 PM
link   
reply to post by sirnex
 


Dude, you're the one who keeps brining up "wishful thinking", God, immaterial consciousness, etc. Not me.

I am trying to talk about this in an unemotional and objective way, which you're apparently not willing to do.

So, have fun with that.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 10:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jezus

Originally posted by EthanT
No, we don't. We don't even have a viable model on how consciousness works, let alone evidence to back that model up.



You can not scientifically prove to anyone that you have consciousness.
You can not scientifically prove to yourself that anyone else has consciousness.


Not according to sirnex



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 12:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Jezus
 



The experience of pain is created by the transmission of information from the external world to the brain.

The perception of pain is an abstract concept to describe our consciousness responding to this information.


Right... the abstract aspect being the language to describe the physical component of that which is being described.


Your questions are interesting but unnecessary to comprehend that consciousness is not a byproduct of synthesizing information.


Cop out.

You laugh, but it's still baseless arbitrary garbage being claimed.


Consciousness is just an abstract concept.


Are we using the same definition of consciousness? I was unaware that awareness was just an abstract quality.

I suppose my unawareness was just abstract too.

reply to post by EthanT
 



Dude, you're the one who keeps brining up "wishful thinking", God, immaterial consciousness, etc. Not me.


OK... You appear to think consciousness can't be explained materially. So if not through the immaterial, then through what other tertiary mechanism would you be willing to proffer to this discussion?


Not according to sirnex


Yea, bad me for not jumping the gun and limiting science simply because science is limited only by current knowledge and discoveries. What is this, the Christian Dark Ages?



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 01:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by sirnex
reply to post by Jezus
 



The experience of pain is created by the transmission of information from the external world to the brain.

The perception of pain is an abstract concept to describe our consciousness responding to this information.


Right... the abstract aspect being the language to describe the physical component of that which is being described.


The feeling of pain is not in any way a "physical component" it is a subjective experience and an abstract concept itself.


Originally posted by sirnex

Your questions are interesting but unnecessary to comprehend that consciousness is not a byproduct of synthesizing information.


Cop out.

You laugh, but it's still baseless arbitrary garbage being claimed.



It is the unavoidable logical conclusion of comprehending consciousness.

The idea that the mind is a byproduct of the brain synthesizing information is "baseless arbitrary garbage"


Originally posted by sirnex

Consciousness is just an abstract concept.


Are we using the same definition of consciousness? I was unaware that awareness was just an abstract quality.

I suppose my unawareness was just abstract too.


Of course awareness is an abstract concept too.

Awareness and consciousness are the most basic examples of what abstract concept means.



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 06:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Jezus
 



The feeling of pain is not in any way a "physical component" it is a subjective experience and an abstract concept itself.


Oh, so your a doctor and know a bit about neuroscience now? I was unaware that there was no physical aspect of pain at all and that it was just all subjective and abstract. Damn we're a bunch of babies!


It is the unavoidable logical conclusion of comprehending consciousness.


Sure, if you throw your hands up in defeat of knowing anything meaningful.


The idea that the mind is a byproduct of the brain synthesizing information is "baseless arbitrary garbage"


It all starts with an egg and a sperm, ask your mom and dad sometime.


Of course awareness is an abstract concept too.

Awareness and consciousness are the most basic examples of what abstract concept means.


You should try and get a paper published Dr. Jezus! You can post your scientific research, experiments and results and really wow the world over! Oh right... Arbitrary. Forgot about that word for a second.



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 09:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by sirnex
Oh, so your a doctor and know a bit about neuroscience now? I was unaware that there was no physical aspect of pain at all and that it was just all subjective and abstract. Damn we're a bunch of babies!


My formal education was focused on physiological psychology.

But again you are confusing the sensation for the perception.
The physical aspect of pain is the transmission of information from the external world to the brain.
This biological processes create the experience but not that which experiences

The perception or feeling of pain is an abstract concept to describe our consciousness responding to this information.


Originally posted by sirnex

Originally posted by Jezus
Awareness and consciousness are the most basic examples of what abstract concept means.


You should try and get a paper published Dr. Jezus! You can post your scientific research, experiments and results and really wow the world over! Oh right... Arbitrary. Forgot about that word for a second.




You seem to be having trouble with the concept of abstract concept...I can understand why because it is in and of itself an abstract concept.



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 09:56 AM
link   


Off topic question, "If a picture is worth a thousand words, does ATS require a second line?"

edit on 26-6-2011 by briantaylor because: to be fully in compliance



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 01:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Jezus
 



My formal education was focused on physiological psychology.


Based upon your arbitrary ramblings and musings, seems it was a waste.


But again you are confusing the sensation for the perception.


Here's a fun task. Post the definition of 'sensation'. You can learn a lot about our language by owning a dictionary an thesaurus.


The physical aspect of pain is the transmission of information from the external world to the brain.
This biological processes create the experience but not that which experiences


Based upon what? Your arbitrarily assumed garbage? There is nothing to indicate that there is a non-physical component of 'experience'. Having language to define a sensation (or if you've gotten a hold of that dictionary/thesaurus yet, perception) is the only abstract thing occurring. The physical component is still the same regardless of what it's called. There is nothing abstract about it.

If that were the case, then simply ignoring hunger, pain, disease, etc should make it all go away. Since it's not ABSTRACT (again learn your words and language usage, it's important), these things exist caused by physical causes with physical consequences. There simply is no way around it and no other verified alternative to it. Abstract arbitrary wishful thinking is simply not how reality operates, and certainly hasn't before our species grew to be the abstract thinking narcissists we are. Right, I just said you're not special.


The perception or feeling of pain is an abstract concept to describe our consciousness responding to this information.


Run into a brick wall. Report your findings.


You seem to be having trouble with the concept of abstract concept...I can understand why because it is in and of itself an abstract concept.


Please for the love of god learn English and how to use words properly. Yes, abstract as itself is.... well abstract. So is our language that defines that particular grouping of sounds and symbols that make up that word. Or any word for that matter! It's all abstract. What's not abstract is the sensation (Have you figured out it's another word for perception yet?) of me punching you in the throat. Hey, you can ignore it and call it abstract if you want. Mind over matter right? LMFAO!



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 02:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by sirnex

Based upon what? Your arbitrarily assumed garbage? There is nothing to indicate that there is a non-physical component of 'experience'. Having language to define a sensation (or if you've gotten a hold of that dictionary/thesaurus yet, perception) is the only abstract thing occurring. The physical component is still the same regardless of what it's called. There is nothing abstract about it.

If that were the case, then simply ignoring hunger, pain, disease, etc should make it all go away. Since it's not ABSTRACT (again learn your words and language usage, it's important), these things exist caused by physical causes with physical consequences. There simply is no way around it and no other verified alternative to it. Abstract arbitrary wishful thinking is simply not how reality operates, and certainly hasn't before our species grew to be the abstract thinking narcissists we are. Right, I just said you're not special.


The physical causations of experience do not equal experience itself. How hard is that to understand?

Pain is a subjective, internal experience. There is no scientific way to measure or quantify this. Looking at behavioral reactions to pain tells you how a person reacts to it, sure, but it tells you nothing about what it feels like to actually experience that pain.

Consciousness does not even exist according to deterministic science. Pain doesn't exist. Love doesn't exist. Any form of qualia don't exist. I can't prove to you that I'm conscious, and you can't prove to me that you're conscious.

All I see from you is consistent ad hominem attacks that purposely evade the topic being discussed in this thread. Obviously there is something about this topic that offends you deeply or else you wouldn't be so hostile in your posting.


Originally posted by sirnex

Please for the love of god learn English and how to use words properly. Yes, abstract as itself is.... well abstract. So is our language that defines that particular grouping of sounds and symbols that make up that word. Or any word for that matter! It's all abstract. What's not abstract is the sensation (Have you figured out it's another word for perception yet?) of me punching you in the throat. Hey, you can ignore it and call it abstract if you want. Mind over matter right? LMFAO!


Uh, I'm pretty sure you're the only one that doesn't understand what abstract means.

Prove to me that you experience pain when you "get punched in the throat." Seriously, prove it. You can't measure it with objective means, so for all I know it doesn't even exist.

If you're a human, you know that pain exists, even if you can't prove it. It's subjective, internal, and unquantifiable.
edit on 26-6-2011 by AlphaZero because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 03:34 PM
link   
As someone who has studied the brain extensively (I have a degree in psych.), people who say there isn't something else there are basically holding their ears and saying lalalalala. It's funny the people who say everything is determinism get upset when you mention the word fate. Determinism=fate, the only difference is fate has some magical association that really upsets 'unbelievers.'
Ask someone who believes in determinism, "so you believe in fate?"
edit on 26-6-2011 by Ghost375 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 04:12 PM
link   
reply to post by AlphaZero
 



The physical causations of experience do not equal experience itself. How hard is that to understand?


I did not state that the physical causation is equal to the language created to define the physical aspect of pain. Now how hard is that to understand?



Pain is a subjective, internal experience. There is no scientific way to measure or quantify this. Looking at behavioral reactions to pain tells you how a person reacts to it, sure, but it tells you nothing about what it feels like to actually experience that pain.


So you don't believe in basic physiology and the nervous system? Hell, might as well not even bother with the fact that the body reacts before we even say "ouch".


Consciousness does not even exist according to deterministic science. Pain doesn't exist. Love doesn't exist. Any form of qualia don't exist. I can't prove to you that I'm conscious, and you can't prove to me that you're conscious.


I agree, if we solely use your arbitrarily assumed mechanism of how self-awareness works. We can't prove any of those things because under your mode of operation, we apparently can't even test for those things. That being why you and your ilk have yet to provide any evidence for these arbitrary assumptions born from your dislike of physical science not jumping at the snap of your finger to explain everything under the sun the minute you have a question.

Thankfully though, science can explain the hormonal responses we call emotions or the "qualia" of pain and similar sensations (also known as perceptions, if you own a thesaurus).



All I see from you is consistent ad hominem attacks that purposely evade the topic being discussed in this thread. Obviously there is something about this topic that offends you deeply or else you wouldn't be so hostile in your posting.


The only thing I dislike about these type of topics is the lack of cognitive usage in the proponents who attack the current limitation of scientific knowledge. Personally I would not like to see a repeat of the Christian Dark Ages because some moron wants to create a new falsehood and attempt to get it accepted by gullible morons who can't be bothered to understand that science isn't about having every g theories and ideas we have about our universe and thing's within it. Science is about patience and being humble until you actually know something is true before you mind numbingly chant in your little church of moronicy hoping others believe in your made up garbage that you continuously pussy foot around proving is actually true. Just saying



Uh, I'm pretty sure you're the only one that doesn't understand what abstract means.


By all means, educate me. Post the definition and we'll discuss it.


Prove to me that you experience pain when you "get punched in the throat." Seriously, prove it. You can't measure it with objective means, so for all I know it doesn't even exist.


I'm sorry, but we can indeed measure the physical condition we call pain. It's a very physical thing with very physical causes and effects upon our bodies. Unless you're against biology as well.


If you're a human, you know that pain exists, even if you can't prove it. It's subjective, internal, and unquantifiable.


If your a smart scientific human, you know this statement to be utter bullcrap.



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 04:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ghost375
As someone who has studied the brain extensively (I have a degree in psych.), people who say there isn't something else there are basically holding their ears and saying lalalalala. It's funny the people who say everything is determinism get upset when you mention the word fate. Determinism=fate, the only difference is fate has some magical association that really upsets 'unbelievers.'
Ask someone who believes in determinism, "so you believe in fate?"
edit on 26-6-2011 by Ghost375 because: (no reason given)


OK... As someone who claims authority, by all means prove that this something else exists.
edit on 26-6-2011 by sirnex because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 04:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ghost375
As someone who has studied the brain extensively (I have a degree in psych.), people who say there isn't something else there are basically holding their ears and saying lalalalala.


How so? Tell us more pls



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 05:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by sirnex
reply to post by AlphaZero
 



The physical causations of experience do not equal experience itself. How hard is that to understand?


I did not state that the physical causation is equal to the language created to define the physical aspect of pain. Now how hard is that to understand?



It's not just a matter of "language." Pain has a subjective aspect. Again, back to the qualia argument.


So you don't believe in basic physiology and the nervous system? Hell, might as well not even bother with the fact that the body reacts before we even say "ouch".


Thanks for totally misinterpreting my posts. I've been acknowledging the physical aspects that cause experience for the whole thread.


I agree, if we solely use your arbitrarily assumed mechanism of how self-awareness works. We can't prove any of those things because under your mode of operation, we apparently can't even test for those things. That being why you and your ilk have yet to provide any evidence for these arbitrary assumptions born from your dislike of physical science not jumping at the snap of your finger to explain everything under the sun the minute you have a question.

Thankfully though, science can explain the hormonal responses we call emotions or the "qualia" of pain and similar sensations (also known as perceptions, if you own a thesaurus).


"Dislike of physical science"? Sorry, but just because we believe that deterministic science can't explain consciousness doesn't mean we think it must be done away with completely. Science has, quite obviously, done infinitely great things for humanity. Still, I'm not sure how that means it's totally free of any flaws whatsoever.

I never once said that we haven't found the neural correlates, hormones, etc. that cause experience and emotions. But again, it doesn't tell you anything about what it's like to experience a given emotion. Qualia aren't equal to reactions within the body.


The only thing I dislike about these type of topics is the lack of cognitive usage in the proponents who attack the current limitation of scientific knowledge. Personally I would not like to see a repeat of the Christian Dark Ages because some moron wants to create a new falsehood and attempt to get it accepted by gullible morons who can't be bothered to understand that science isn't about having every g theories and ideas we have about our universe and thing's within it. Science is about patience and being humble until you actually know something is true before you mind numbingly chant in your little church of moronicy hoping others believe in your made up garbage that you continuously pussy foot around proving is actually true. Just saying


Yes because showing that consciousness can't be explained with determinism is going to send us into a barbaric Christian Dark Age. Really?

What, exactly, is wrong with pointing out flaws in determinism? If it really offends you that much, that's not much better than any religious fanatic.

You are blowing this issue way out of proportion. I really fail to see how this is going to lead to the dissolution of the scientific method.


I'm sorry, but we can indeed measure the physical condition we call pain. It's a very physical thing with very physical causes and effects upon our bodies. Unless you're against biology as well.


Again, you miss the point. This doesn't address qualia at all.

Perhaps the definition of a "philosophical zombie" will help:


A philosophical zombie or p-zombie in the philosophy of mind and perception is a hypothetical being that is indistinguishable from a normal human being except in that it lacks conscious experience, qualia, or sentience.[1] When a zombie is poked with a sharp object, for example, it does not feel any pain though it behaves exactly as if it does feel pain (it may say "ouch" and recoil from the stimulus, or tell us that it is in intense pain).


And I'm not "against" biology at all...


If your a smart scientific human, you know this statement to be utter bullcrap.


Insulting people's intelligence isn't going to strengthen your argument.



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 06:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by sirnex

The physical aspect of pain is the transmission of information from the external world to the brain.
This biological processes create the experience but not that which experiences


Based upon what?


Comprehending the fundamental nature of consciousness.


Originally posted by sirnex
There is nothing to indicate that there is a non-physical component of 'experience'.


The experience itself is non-physical and an abstract concept.


Originally posted by sirnex
Having language to define a sensation (or if you've gotten a hold of that dictionary/thesaurus yet, perception) is the only abstract thing occurring. The physical component is still the same regardless of what it's called. There is nothing abstract about it.


Both sensation and perception are abstract concepts.


Originally posted by sirnex
If that were the case, then simply ignoring hunger, pain, disease, etc should make it all go away. Since it's not ABSTRACT (again learn your words and language usage, it's important), these things exist caused by physical causes with physical consequences. There simply is no way around it and no other verified alternative to it. Abstract arbitrary wishful thinking is simply not how reality operates, and certainly hasn't before our species grew to be the abstract thinking narcissists we are. Right, I just said you're not special.


Pain is an abstract concept, that isn't debatable. You obviously don't comprehend what an abstract concept is...


Originally posted by sirnex
Please for the love of god learn English and how to use words properly. Yes, abstract as itself is.... well abstract. So is our language that defines that particular grouping of sounds and symbols that make up that word. Or any word for that matter! It's all abstract. What's not abstract is the sensation (Have you figured out it's another word for perception yet?) of me punching you in the throat. Hey, you can ignore it and call it abstract if you want. Mind over matter right? LMFAO!


Your seriously don't no what an abstract concept is...



posted on Jun, 26 2011 @ 06:17 PM
link   
Sensation and perception are connected by distinct.

First, these are BOTH abstract concept.

Sensation is the synthesis of information in the brain creating an experience (feelings).

Perception is consciousness responding to this experience.



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 07:59 AM
link   
Just wanted ya'all to know I haven't abandoned this thread. I was away for the weekend.

It appears to have taken a life of its own, but I'll read through it when I have more time and make comments where it seems necessary.

ETA (after reading): While I commend those of you patiently grappling with a certain user, this particular one will wear you out eventually. At some point, accept that you've made the points that a discerning reader might need to hear, and walk away. Just sayin'.


(Not that I mind the thread bumps)


edit on 27-6-2011 by NewlyAwakened because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 08:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by ExistentialNightmare

a person's choices merely appear in his mental stream as if sprung from the void.

While I would say this is true of thoughts, and also of actions requiring minimal attention, things like focus and effort appear much more tied to an act of will. "Choices" per se can be either. If you have a spontaneous thought that you need to go buy milk, then go get in your car, drive to the store, buy milk, and come back, there is very little that is willed in that series of actions. You are essentially on autopilot.

Learning to drive a car if you've never driven one before, on the other hand, is a completely different animal. There is nothing "autopilot" about this.

In one case, we are following an already-blazed trail. In another, we are building new trails. Even within the brain, two very different things are happening.

It might be that the only "will" we have is in certain areas, such as the will to exert focus and effort, to persevere, or not. Exerting this will has the physical effect of directing the construction of "neural networks". Relaxing the will and instead reacting to every whim, means "sliding down" existing ones.

This is speculative. As I think I mentioned in a reply to Jezus, "will" is a slippery concept that has paradoxes which are difficult to resolve, even after accepting the fact that neural materialist determinism is false. Certain spiritual and occult ideas help here, when they're not horrendously misunderstood. This includes the words of Jesus, and incidentally when he on several occasions said "he who has ears to hear let him hear", he was not saying this for emphasis. There are forces within us that are not animal and not habitual response, but also not identifiable with our own ego.



Originally posted by ExistentialNightmare
Also, where's your avatar gone!? I liked it.

What did it look like? I'm pretty sure I've never had an avatar on this site (but I could be wrong).


edit on 27-6-2011 by NewlyAwakened because: (no reason given)







 
4
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join