Cybernetics tells us Conscious Energy must exist

Cybernetics tells us that the human body is a machine. It's a machine that has specific functions. These functions need a User(Conscious Energy) in order for things like self awareness, self image, recall of specific memories at will and more to occur.

The human body is a machine like the TV or the DVD Player. They have specific functions but they require a User(Conscious Energy) in order to push play on the DVD player or to turn the TV on. When a TV breaks down you say the TV is dead. This is because even when energy flows through the TV it doesn't work. The same with the human body. It's either broken and can be fixed or it's dead. This doesn't mean the Conscious Energy that flows through the human body is dead, it's just looking for another medium.

When Neuroscientist look at the brain, they make huge assumptions. They will say because there's activity in a part of the brain when a specific activity occurs, this means this part of the brain is responsible for that specific activity. This is just silly. There's ZERO evidence that the brain can do a lot of these things like recall specific memories at will or have a self image. The brain is equipped with these functions but it's the User(Conscious Energy) that causes these specific functions to occur.

For instance, my cable modem has one light blinking when I'm not on the internet. When I'm surfing the internet three lights are blinking. The User(Conscious Energy) has to be surfing the internet in order for the specific activity on my cable modem can occur.

reply to post by neoholographic


If conscious energy does exist maybe it's somehow related to the dark matter and dark energy that allegedly binds the galaxies together.

Intelligent designed universe so to speak!

reply to post by andy06shake



Good points.

Another example is the human body doesn't know the difference between a real or imagined experience. We see this in cases of anxiety.The User(Conscious Energy) can put the Body(machine) into different states real or imagined. This is because the User(Conscious Energy) controls the machine (human body).

andy06shake
reply to post by neoholographic

 

If conscious energy does exist maybe it's somehow related to the dark matter and dark energy that allegedly binds the galaxies together.

Intelligent designed universe so to speak!

edit on 6-10-2013 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)

I think it has to exist we and the world around us are made of it..

reply to post by neoholographic


Well consciousness must be residing somewhere. Ether that or we don't have a correct understanding of what consciousness actually is.

There is a notion currently doing the rounds that essentially postulates that reality is in fact a holographic projection combine this with recent idea that the universe could quite possibly be bigger on the inside than on the outside and one has to wonder what the hell do we really know about consciousness, reality and the universe in which we reside(Or do we?)!

Is our universe/reality big? Is it small? Are we really here at all? I strongly suspect the answer is its all about perspective.

www.dailygalaxy.com...

www.space.com...

See how this fits with your ideas or if it changes it.

reply to post by purplemer


"I think it has to exist we and the world around us are made of it."

Very true Purplemer!

reply to post by neoholographic


You are exactly correct. Any kind of machine like the internet, even computer programs, have been written by humans who are doing creative thinking. I have a rough philosophy written about this from when I was in college, and in there, there is a thesis paper I wrote about how it could be quantum related.

I got told a lot of "Occam's Razor this" and "Occam's razor that" but I don't think that the mind relies on Newtonian Mechanics. That is silly, well, actually an incredibly complicated subject.

There is a lot of peer pressure (read: bias) in modern science and psychology that is heavily against doing any kind of research into spiritual science, one topic of which is free will, which you are hitting on here.

My idea regarding free will is that sure, we may not have 100% free will (that would be really stressful as you can see here in a moment) but we have enough to make routines for ourselves - and we can edit them. It is called learning, or whatever.

I personally have too high of a free will percentage - pretty much everything I do is a choice I have to make, or else it doesn't happen. It can cause a lot of stress.

Contrary to popular belief, there are experiments that can be done in order to help explore this realm, I've been working on designing a few but I am a bit unreliable - one application to the branch of science I'm exploring, however, is plant communication.

reply to post by darkbake


Exactly!

I just finished a study on Awareness and when your Awareness is limited to a small point then your reality is confined to that small point.

Science says that consciousness must be an emergent property of the material brain. There's zero evidence to support this notion but many people are confined to this reality. They can't think outside of this paradigm. So when you talk about things like the quantum mind or consciousness being a fundamental property of reality, you hit a brick wall. This is because many in the scientific community can't think past the paradigm that consciousness must be an emergent property of the material brain.

When you limit your Awareness then your reality is confined. It goes back to Plato and the Allegory of the Cave. Some people are just in the prison of their limited Awareness.

reply to post by neoholographic


Lots of people also cannot get there head around these concepts due to religious ideologies instilled since birth. Pretty much because organised religion does not like people who question the status quo or how things work.

This however is beginning to change largely due to the inception of the internet and people are at last beginning to question the reality in which they reside.

Who knows what the future holds if we don't blow ourselves up in the process of discovery.

One can but hope!

We think about these things. We want answers to these questions because realizing profound truths makes us feel a certain feeling that we like to feel. We see these truths in our lives, but it's forced. We have to keep reminding ourselves that the world and life is a certain way in order to keep seeing it that way. In our day to day life, these ideas aren't really relevant.

It seems we chase these ideas because we think, "if the world is a certain way" then I could enjoy life". To me, it seems more useful to not chase an idea and just use your preexisting, natural perception, and learn how to enjoy the way you already see the world. It seems more useful and more beneficial to do that instead of waiting on your ideal perception to come along so that you can enjoy it. Enjoy here and now. So you don't have to try as hard to be satisfied or happy.

andy06shake
Lots of people also cannot get there head around these concepts due to religious ideologies instilled since birth.

Actually this thread looks more like religion than science.

I don't see a reference anywhere to a scientific paper, just a bunch of people saying what may as well be religious beliefs, considering the lack of scientific references cited here.

Sure there's a lot about the brain and consciousness we don't understand yet, but what I see is people jumping to conclusions about what we don't know yet. The field of research is young...give researchers some time to study it before jumping to unwarranted conclusions.

reply to post by Arbitrageur


It's more like religion than science to you because of your limited awareness. This is what you want to see.

It's funny how people say consciousness isn't understood in one breathe and in the next breathe they say consciousness is an emergent property of the material brain. Which is it? If consciousness isn't understood then how do you know it's an emergent property of the material brain vs. a fundamental property of reality?

People have limited awareness so they accept that consciousness isn't understood yet it must be a fundamental property of the material brain.

If people in the scientific community would expand their awareness we would know more about consciousness in a year then we have learned about consciousness over the last 50 years. For this to happen, the paradigm that consciousness is an emergent property of the material brain would have to be discarded. Sadly, people have tied their belief system to this paradigm.

I believe consciousness is well understood. It's obvious based on science that consciousness isn't an emergent property of the material brain. How can the material brain recall specific memories at will? How does the material brain know the difference between these specific memories?

Just like the body doesn't know the difference between a real or imagined experience the brain doesn't know the difference between a memory from little league baseball to a memory from the Army. The brain stores these memories but the User(Conscious Energy) recalls these specific memories at will and gives these memories meaning.

The body is a machine just like a TV or a DVD Player. The User(Conscious Energy) operates the machine. So until there's a paradigm shift in science and we don't start with the priori that consciousness must be an emergent property of the material brain, these things will never be fully understood.

Take someone and remove part of their skull.

Stick a straw randomly into their brain and suck out parts of it.

Ask the person to describe themselves.

Eventually the person will not be the same person. Who are they? Where has their 'consciousness' gone?

Same with someone suffering severe brain trauma after an accident, who becomes someone entirely different.

YOU are the result of the unique chemical and electrical activity in your brain. Remove that, and you.. YOU.. cease to exist. No life after death, no aery faery floating off into the ether as YOU, saying Howdy to all your dead friends and relatives. No. WIthout the chemical and electrical activity within your brain, which has been shaped by your lifetime of experience, YOU do not exist.

Every time you learn something, you change physically, your brain.

No, the conscious doesn't exist anywhere specific.. no more than a sunset is one specific thing. It's a combination of many things that create a beautiful experience. You can remove small parts of it and it remains almost the same. But you cannot recreate it entirely without those elements and if you drastically change something you create something else.

YOU are only YOU because YOU are there to be it. As soon as YOU change, you are different.

reply to post by winofiend


YOU prove my point with this quote:

Eventually the person will not be the same person. Who are they? Where has their 'consciousness' gone?

All this shows is that the machine(human body) has been damaged. It's no different than when when your TV breaks down, you say the TV is dead. When the machine can't be fixed and it dies it just means the User(Conscious Energy) can't operate it anymore.

When YOU say YOU what do YOU mean? How do YOU know what YOU mean?

You say it has to do with electrical activity, what electrical activity recalls specific memories at will? What electrical activity tells the electrical activity which specific memory you wish to recall and what it means?

When I want to go to the store what electrical activity tells the electrical activity in my brain which store I want to go to? How does this electrical activity know the difference between Walmart or Kmart?

How do YOU know you're YOU? Which electrical activity tells the electrical activity in the material brain that YOU are YOU?

At the end of the day, science tells us there has to be a User that operates the machine. Saying that the material brain somehow knows the material brain is YOU because the material brain told itself that it's YOU is just...silly.

I really liked an analogy that was shared in another thread. Consider an RC helicopter (or any vehicle). The helicopter is your body, and the remote control is the "user".

When you remove parts of a person's brain, they cannot interact as they used to, so we tend to assume the "user" has been affected.

But think, if you mess with the helicopter's motor, bend its rotors, tamper with the circuitry to disrupt its ability to receive remote signals.

The user is unchanged, but the helicopter will no longer behave normally.

The brain could be the medium between through which the "user" communicates to the body, to communicate to the external world. Tampering with the brain would only serve to tamper with the connection between the "user" and their body.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but there is nothing to date that scientifically supports one idea over the other. (The two ideas being 1: the user is separate from the brain and 2: the user is the brain)

reply to post by Arbitrageur


"Actually this thread looks more like religion than science."

Well metaphysics and science have been coming closer together as our understanding of the universe progresses, maybe that's why.

"I don't see a reference anywhere to a scientific paper, just a bunch of people saying what may as well be religious beliefs, considering the lack of scientific references cited here."

I suggest you go back and look again considering i have provided links to the subject matter that I thought was pertinent to the OPs thread. I have no idea as to their credibility all the same however the subject matter is rather cutting edge.

Were just spitballing really.

andy06shake
I suggest you go back and look again considering i have provided links to the subject matter that I thought was pertinent to the OPs thread. I have no idea as to their credibility all the same however the subject matter is rather cutting edge.

The topic of the thread is: "Cybernetics tells us Conscious Energy must exist"

Neither of the links you posted had anything to do with cybernetics, or conscious energy for that matter.

That daily galaxy article wasn't that bad even if off-topic, but I'd suggest avoiding the daily galaxy in general as some of their articles are completely made up nonsense, so if you're not careful you'll eventually end up citing one of those if you use them as a source.

reply to post by neoholographic

When Neuroscientist look at the brain, they make huge assumptions. They will say because there's activity in a part of the brain when a specific activity occurs, this means this part of the brain is responsible for that specific activity. This is just silly. There's ZERO evidence that the brain can do a lot of these things like recall specific memories at will or have a self image. The brain is equipped with these functions but it's the User(Conscious Energy) that causes these specific functions to occur.

I'm not really following what you mean. Specific areas of the brain do correspond to specific functions. Speech, vision, body movement,memory, etc. I worked with head injured people for a number of years and can tell you that it's true. Unless I'm misunderstanding your comments, I will have to completely disagree.

reply to post by neoholographic

I believe consciousness is well understood. It's obvious based on science that consciousness isn't an emergent property of the material brain. How can the material brain recall specific memories at will? How does the material brain know the difference between these specific memories?

There is a lot going on within the brain. Memory is very elusive. How Memory Works: Interview with Psychologist Daniel L. Schacter

The brain does not know the difference between specific memories, it only thinks it does.

One of the interesting recent lines of research that my lab has been involved in over the past few years has been looking at similarities between what goes on between the brain and mind when we remember past events on the one hand and imagine events that might occur in the future or might have occurred in the past. What we have found, particularly with brain scanning studies, is that you get very similar brain networks coming online when you remember past events and imagine future events, for example. Many of the same brain regions or network of structures come online, and this has helped us understand more why, for example, imagining events that might have occurred can be so harmful to memory accuracy because when you imagine, you’re recruiting many of the same brain regions as accessed when you actually remember. So it’s not surprising that some of these imagined events can actually turn into false memories under the right circumstances. - See more at: hnn.us...