Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Lekatt · 07-22-2008, 07:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Panpsychist

I can only tell you how I resolved the issue. For now.

I view "supernatural" as ultimately saying "The laws of nature are such that they address at least certain individuals at the level of the Person, and cannot be reduced to a far lower level".

For example, the stars in astrology affect persons on high levels, such as their love, economic success, and so on; not on a lower level such as their molecules. The purpoted existenced of Heaven means that the "person" is transported to paradise, Providence that the world is guided by concern for the fate of humans, God's omnipotence that the person God has special rules that apply only to him (and not to his constituents), and so on.

With this understanding, consciousness is not in-itself supernatural. Even if you're a dualist, believing that spirit and matter are two substances (I don't), this isn't supernaturalism. It will only be supernaturalism is you think a person is not composed of more elementary mental/physical constituents which are themselves governed by laws that do not take the person into account.

I personally believe that consciousness, in the sense of being-aware-of-X, is omnipresent in the universe, accompanying every physical interaction. But this does not mean that things are supernatural. The fundamental rules do revolve around awareness-of (simply because consciousness is ubiquitous so any rule could be cast in these terms), but not around qualities of a Person (such as his will, memories, moral significance, economic success, and so on). Therefore there are no insubstantial minds (mind is matter), you cannot address the spirit of the tree (it has none; only its constituents are aware-of, and no part of it is aware-of- your speech, let alone comprehends it), you cannot bend spoons by your sheer willpower (but can will the spoon to bend and then bend it with your hand...), nothing breaks the laws of physics, and so on.

I don't expect you to follow my rather-esoteric views, but perhaps this will encourage you to realize that there isn't really anything supernatural about consciousness. Even if you see it as a different substance, this need not imply supernaturalism.

I think I understand what you are saying and I like it.

NumberTenOx · 07-22-2008, 11:06 PM

I actually don't think this is that difficult.

First, think of when you first realized how evolution worked. Before, it seemed unbelievable that the fantastic complexity of life could have developed "on it's own". But then you grasp the concept of natural selection, how a series of small genetic mutations can be selected for and increase the complexity of a species. From there, it's just a matter of imagination to embrace the idea that all life evolved.

For consciousness, we have the model of software. I remember seeing a robot at the MIT Museum that was described as the "first to recognize itself" in a mirror. Imagine a robot that formed a continuous model of the real world, that continuously identified objects and its place and interaction with that world. From there, it's just a matter of imagination to embrace the idea that consciousness is just really complicated "software" running in our heads.

There is really obvious empirical evidence of this. Bash your head really hard and you lose all or part of your consciousness. Take drugs and your consciousness changes. Stick electrical probes in your brain and you can stimulate thoughts and feelings and memories.

What we're missing is a basic understanding of how the brain operates. How are memories stored and retrieved? How do we calculate the trajectory of moving objects? How do we recognize and retrieve language? My guess is that there is a basic type of computational element that is adapted to all these different functions, but I'm not a neurologist.

Finally, it's a total cop-out to call anything "supernatural", as has been noted in other responses. I totally don't buy the "we'll never understand consciousness" comments. We will, once we crack a few tough problems.

Lekatt · 07-23-2008, 06:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NumberTenOx

I actually don't think this is that difficult.

First, think of when you first realized how evolution worked. Before, it seemed unbelievable that the fantastic complexity of life could have developed "on it's own". But then you grasp the concept of natural selection, how a series of small genetic mutations can be selected for and increase the complexity of a species. From there, it's just a matter of imagination to embrace the idea that all life evolved.

For consciousness, we have the model of software. I remember seeing a robot at the MIT Museum that was described as the "first to recognize itself" in a mirror. Imagine a robot that formed a continuous model of the real world, that continuously identified objects and its place and interaction with that world. From there, it's just a matter of imagination to embrace the idea that consciousness is just really complicated "software" running in our heads.

There is really obvious empirical evidence of this. Bash your head really hard and you lose all or part of your consciousness. Take drugs and your consciousness changes. Stick electrical probes in your brain and you can stimulate thoughts and feelings and memories.

What we're missing is a basic understanding of how the brain operates. How are memories stored and retrieved? How do we calculate the trajectory of moving objects? How do we recognize and retrieve language? My guess is that there is a basic type of computational element that is adapted to all these different functions, but I'm not a neurologist.

Finally, it's a total cop-out to call anything "supernatural", as has been noted in other responses. I totally don't buy the "we'll never understand consciousness" comments. We will, once we crack a few tough problems.

There are still a large majority of us people that don't believe we just happened accidentally and by the magic of natural selection and evolution became what we are today. I don't believe in accidents because even accidents have causes.

LeoM · 07-23-2008, 08:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NumberTenOx

I actually don't think this is that difficult.

First, think of when you first realized how evolution worked. Before, it seemed unbelievable that the fantastic complexity of life could have developed "on it's own". But then you grasp the concept of natural selection, how a series of small genetic mutations can be selected for and increase the complexity of a species. From there, it's just a matter of imagination to embrace the idea that all life evolved.

For consciousness, we have the model of software. I remember seeing a robot at the MIT Museum that was described as the "first to recognize itself" in a mirror. Imagine a robot that formed a continuous model of the real world, that continuously identified objects and its place and interaction with that world. From there, it's just a matter of imagination to embrace the idea that consciousness is just really complicated "software" running in our heads.

There is really obvious empirical evidence of this. Bash your head really hard and you lose all or part of your consciousness. Take drugs and your consciousness changes. Stick electrical probes in your brain and you can stimulate thoughts and feelings and memories.

What we're missing is a basic understanding of how the brain operates. How are memories stored and retrieved? How do we calculate the trajectory of moving objects? How do we recognize and retrieve language? My guess is that there is a basic type of computational element that is adapted to all these different functions, but I'm not a neurologist.

Finally, it's a total cop-out to call anything "supernatural", as has been noted in other responses. I totally don't buy the "we'll never understand consciousness" comments. We will, once we crack a few tough problems.

That one of the common misconceptions materialists have about dualists that consciousness will never been explained. Their are many possible dualistic explanations for mind brain correlation such as the transmission theory.

We know yes the brain affects consciousness and mind but the mind and consciousness also has an effect on the brain through meditation, neuroplasticity which has been demonstrated by Dr.Sharon Begley, Dr. Jeffery Schwartz, Dr. Mario Beauregard, Physicist Henry Stapp.

For the production theory to work brain can only affect mind but mind can NEVER effect brain.

LeoM · 07-23-2008, 08:24 AM

Here's the link

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_M._Schwartz

NumberTenOx · 07-23-2008, 08:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lekatt

There are still a large majority of us people that don't believe we just happened accidentally and by the magic of natural selection and evolution became what we are today. I don't believe in accidents because even accidents have causes.

I apologize; this being the infidels board I was addressing my remarks to those who already understand and accept evolution.

I don't think your world view is as far from mine as you think it is. I presume from your statement that you believe God created life, and that there is some supernatural component to consciousness. Let's respect the topic of this thread and skip the evolution debate for the moment.

So let's assume there is some supernatural component to consciousness. What does this component bring to the table? Is it my mind, fully conscious and aware as I am right now? Somehow separate from the physical world?

If so, it is tightly bound to the brain. Here are some questions I have for you:

- What is this component doing when we're young? A fetus? Why can't we remember that time? Why does our thinking capacity seem to mirror our brain growth?

- Why do we get drunk, in the sense of how can alchohol affect a supernatural component?

- Why does deterioration or damage of the brain seem to mirror the function of our consciousness?

First, do you agree that all of these things happen? That the function of our consciousness seems to closely mirror the physical condition of our brains? If you're with me so far, then there is only a small difference in our world views. Because a "supernatural component" that is so tightly bound to the real world is hardly "super"-natural.

I do think it's interesting that people believe that there is this supernatural piece of us that is separate and complicated, then shrinks to almost nothing when we're conceived, grows in awareness with our growth, then deteriorates with our deterioration, then suddenly pops back to maximum strength when we die.

NumberTenOx · 07-23-2008, 08:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeoM

For the production theory to work brain can only affect mind but mind can NEVER effect brain.

You're kidding, right?

The point of having consciousness is that it provides a complex control mechanism for the body, that has tremendous survival value. I think "move my arm" and my arm moves. I close my eyes and imagine the object of my sexual desire, and all sorts of changes happen to my body. The mind can effect all sorts of changes to my body, and these can NEVER effect my brain? Come on.

NumberTenOx · 07-23-2008, 09:07 AM

Another trivial example. There are "field programmable arrays" used in computers. These arrays can change their hard-wired connections based on voltages applied to their pins. Install one of these in a computer, and the software can change the programming of these arrays to more efficiently compute.

badger3k · 07-23-2008, 09:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NumberTenOx

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeoM

For the production theory to work brain can only affect mind but mind can NEVER effect brain.

You're kidding, right?

The point of having consciousness is that it provides a complex control mechanism for the body, that has tremendous survival value. I think "move my arm" and my arm moves. I close my eyes and imagine the object of my sexual desire, and all sorts of changes happen to my body. The mind can effect all sorts of changes to my body, and these can NEVER effect my brain? Come on.

I agree with you - the brain is a part of our body (not apart). Even the act of seeing something makes changes in our brains, and thinking along certain paths can stengthen connections in our brains; when our brains are damaged, to some degree (depending on numerous factors) our brains can readjust - the blind man who's "sight" area of the brain is coopted for another function. Our brains are constantly changing, as is the rest of our body.

What is the definition of consciousness being used here (on this thread)? Is it strictly self-awareness, or our so-called higher reasoning - considering that we are learning more about other animals and we keep finding things that were once considered a product of consciousness (tool use, limited language, waiting for a larger reward - time keeping, etc), what exactly are we talking about?

badger3k · 07-23-2008, 09:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NumberTenOx

Another trivial example. There are "field programmable arrays" used in computers. These arrays can change their hard-wired connections based on voltages applied to their pins. Install one of these in a computer, and the software can change the programming of these arrays to more efficiently compute.

Kewl - soon, my army of lethal fem-bots will be ready...

seriously, that is fantastic - when can I get one for my home computer...

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-22-2008, 11:06 PM	#22
NumberTenOx Regular Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: Bellevue, WA Posts: 284	I actually don't think this is that difficult. First, think of when you first realized how evolution worked. Before, it seemed unbelievable that the fantastic complexity of life could have developed "on it's own". But then you grasp the concept of natural selection, how a series of small genetic mutations can be selected for and increase the complexity of a species. From there, it's just a matter of imagination to embrace the idea that all life evolved. For consciousness, we have the model of software. I remember seeing a robot at the MIT Museum that was described as the "first to recognize itself" in a mirror. Imagine a robot that formed a continuous model of the real world, that continuously identified objects and its place and interaction with that world. From there, it's just a matter of imagination to embrace the idea that consciousness is just really complicated "software" running in our heads. There is really obvious empirical evidence of this. Bash your head really hard and you lose all or part of your consciousness. Take drugs and your consciousness changes. Stick electrical probes in your brain and you can stimulate thoughts and feelings and memories. What we're missing is a basic understanding of how the brain operates. How are memories stored and retrieved? How do we calculate the trajectory of moving objects? How do we recognize and retrieve language? My guess is that there is a basic type of computational element that is adapted to all these different functions, but I'm not a neurologist. Finally, it's a total cop-out to call anything "supernatural", as has been noted in other responses. I totally don't buy the "we'll never understand consciousness" comments. We will, once we crack a few tough problems.

07-23-2008, 08:24 AM	#25
LeoM Banned Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Canada Posts: 2,027	Here's the link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_M._Schwartz

07-23-2008, 09:07 AM	#28
NumberTenOx Regular Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: Bellevue, WA Posts: 284	Another trivial example. There are "field programmable arrays" used in computers. These arrays can change their hard-wired connections based on voltages applied to their pins. Install one of these in a computer, and the software can change the programming of these arrays to more efficiently compute.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.