Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Mr. Sammi · 07-02-2002, 06:30 AM

This is offshoot of the mind and brain and body border topic. This topic will try to deal with and show some proper and necessary FUNDAMENTAL activities the brain must be able to perform.

I like the idea that the brain must fundamentally be able to ACCUMULATE.

It would seem that accumulating or gathering is necessary for almost any activity. Accumulating adds reality to the abstract idea of 1 + 1, is not 1 or more than 1.

Memory is based on accumulating. Experience is the accumulation of many independent elements compounded within simultaneous range AND then accumulated by the one who experiences.

If accumulating is a natural part of us, then from where did this "intent to gather" spring or could have sprung?

I am looking foward to hearing all the juicy and meaty responses, I have come to expect and enjoy from this little group which accumulated under our noses...

Sammi Na Boodie ()

ps. If the brain accumulates, then what would be the extension of accumulating the mind should be able to posess?

Mr. Sammi · 07-03-2002, 04:34 AM

To think of it, I seem to be accumulating information in my brain, at a constant rate, through the sensory apparatus I posess, seemingly from outside of us.

To think of it, to be able to accumulate, the accumulator has to be able to (1) accumulate things and (2) something must be available through not-accumulating.

This would seem a clear implication for each thing accumulated there was the very same thing which was disposessed elsewhere.

To bring the point closer to home, in order to accumulate, there must be a donor, a giver, something which will end up being missed or nearly missed, so the accumulator can accumulate.

I can then say we accumulate information that is outside of us. The carriers of information in the world constantly allow us to accumulate this information within our head, by providing the information.

Does this lead me to say that a fundamental activity of the brain is to accumulate information outside of the brain. In doing so the brain must posess a native function of accumulation.

Sammi Na Boodie ()

The Messiah · 07-03-2002, 04:56 AM

Do you know how information is stored in the brain?

Mr. Sammi · 07-04-2002, 05:42 AM

Accumulation is all about in the brain. There is so much evidence of it that it is impossible not to give accumulation its proper treatment.

I find it remarkable how the body and brain accumulates mass. Normally we call this type of accumulation growing. A concept with which most of you may be familiar. Growing must be seen as accumulation with parameters. When enough accumulation is obtained, which must be seen as a treshold of this type of accumulation, the elements which previously accumulated now seem to have stopped their accumulation practices. It is obvious the treshold of accumulation practices is passed on from generation to generation via the sperm/egg combination.

But what does this "accumulation" tell us of bodily life apart from mental life. What would such an element of philosophy give us of value which would cause an improvment in the condition of life?

It is no great lie that the body accumulates fat, This is as obvious to a two year old that cries "mommy look at that fat lady with that fine man".

Basically we must look at the natural tresholds of accumulation in relation to "intelligent tresholds" of accumulation. Intelligent tresholds merly signify using abstraction in relation to reality in order to gain benefit while within the reality.

Can we now say, please do not eat too much. Please do not accumulate too much experience without rest, please do not accumulate bad friends since this may veer your reality off into the treshold of life (death).

Does anyone agree, that I never need to know how information is stored in the brain, in order to derive this fundamental of the brain which is clearly accumulation.

Sammi Na Boodie ()

emphryio · 07-04-2002, 02:14 PM

Quote:

Does anyone agree, that I never need to know how information is stored in the brain, in order to derive this fundamental of the brain which is clearly accumulation.

I disagree I guess. Based on what little we know, the brain could just be a receptor for receiving the stored information from somewhere else. Like some currently undetectable field all around us.
Of course that's rather "far out" and I doubt it.

Also what are you getting at about accumulation?
I have a theory that every piece of "memory/information" is stored atop one another in complex 3d shapes encompassing most or all of the brain. Functional MRI currently isn't good enough yet to prove or disprove this.

Truthfully it doesn't interest me much currently. I just felt sorry no one else was responding.

Mr. Sammi · 07-05-2002, 05:05 AM

emphyrio, this is philosophy, not a quest for attention.

My thoughts about accumulation IS in direct relationship to fundamentals.

I notice quite a number of flaws in your argument, since you use the word stored, and fail to see the accumulative section in storing.

Again based on evidence, visual evidence, the human does accumulate, and it is absulutely unnecessary to use MRI, or any scientific method to deduce this, OTHER than simple reasoning.

Accumulation in humans was deduced from visual interpretation of human life. The philosophical basis of this is reason.

Seeing accumulation does not interest you much, I do not really expect a reply. Thanks all the same for the effort, and do remember you did accumulate since you last read.

The human mind stands greatly before science. I think it was the human mind that invented science. How could have science invented itself?

Additionally, I believe how and if people respond is crucial to the value of a topic. This leads to the conclusion that a topic of little or no value will eventually become EXTINCT.

Sammi Na Boodie ()

[ July 05, 2002: Message edited by: Sammi ]</p>

Keith Russell · 07-10-2002, 07:18 AM

Greetings:

By 'accumulation', do you perhaps mean 'integration'?

We don't remember every instance of 'blue' we've experienced. We distill the concept 'blue' and the memory of all the specific essentials of each occurance of 'blue' is not retained in memory.

Yes, we can--and do--remember certain instances of 'blue'; a blue dress, our blue dream car, etc.

But, most concepts retained in consciousness are the result of integration of principles, and deletion of specifics.

Do you agree?

Keith.

Mr. Sammi · 07-10-2002, 09:20 AM

Perhaps integration is 1 sample of accumulation.

Although the accumulation of sensory samples and perhaps sensory patterns end up as some recallable memories sometimes, where would the unrecallable end up? Residing as sensory non-patterns? Is it still floating around in the head perhaps to be dreamt out, OR does it exit through the ears OR is there an unknown brain function which dissipates "non-integrated" data VIA some very high frequency modulators?

All I can say philosophically is all the sensory data accumulates in the head. Science can show the rest unless some preponderous reason steps into mind to define the accumulated non-integrated. I use non-integrated as the logical opposite of what you refer to as integrated.

* * *

I see integration, as you put it, up in the hierarchy, and I must say you have a very well expressed term.

The opposite of accumulation is dispensing. To accumulate must necessarily have implied dispensing. To dispense here means accumulation elsewhere AND note the function of enduring the dispensing before the accumulation commences. Except perhaps in dual-state to N-state transitions where accumulating and dispensing are simultaneous(no state has to endure the other state's transition before its own transition can occur).

How would you see integration in this light.

Yes within reason, concepts accumulated must be the dispensing, as a result of integration of principles (not sure I fully understand this word in philosophy) and perhaps a few other accumulated patterns, of which one should be the denial of specifics.

Sammi Na Boodie ()

Mr. Sammi · 07-15-2002, 04:46 AM

How are we doing with our thinking caps on this one? Should I post the conclusion...

Do we really need this information accumulated in our brains so it can be integrated in our minds,or should it just be dismissed into oblivion.

Sammi Na Boodie ()

tronvillain · 07-15-2002, 11:07 AM

Sammi:

Quote:

If accumulating is a natural part of us, then from where did this "intent to gather" spring or could have sprung?

Well, there is the obvious and somewhat uninformative answer "evolution." Except that it is not an "intent to gather" any more than a thermostat has an "intent to regulate temperature."

Quote:

To think of it, I seem to be accumulating information in my brain, at a constant rate, through the sensory apparatus I posess, seemingly from outside of us.

Is it at a constant rate? I suspect that someone could go through an entire day accumulating virtually no information, while on another day they could accumulate large amounts.

Quote:

To think of it, to be able to accumulate, the accumulator has to be able to (1) accumulate things and (2) something must be available through not-accumulating.

This would seem a clear implication for each thing accumulated there was the very same thing which was disposessed elsewhere.

It should be obvious to almost anyone that this is not the case, at least not when it comes to something abstract like "information." I will now go to a phone book and write down someone's name and phone number, yet their name and phone number will completely fail to be dispossed elsewhere.

Quote:

I can then say we accumulate information that is outside of us. The carriers of information in the world constantly allow us to accumulate this information within our head, by providing the information.

Does this lead me to say that a fundamental activity of the brain is to accumulate information outside of the brain. In doing so the brain must posess a native function of accumulation.

In a way perhaps. So what?

Thanks in advance, you arrogant pretentious ass.

07-02-2002, 06:30 AM	#1
Mr. Sammi Banned Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Montr�al Posts: 367	FUNDAMENTALS This is offshoot of the mind and brain and body border topic. This topic will try to deal with and show some proper and necessary FUNDAMENTAL activities the brain must be able to perform. I like the idea that the brain must fundamentally be able to ACCUMULATE. It would seem that accumulating or gathering is necessary for almost any activity. Accumulating adds reality to the abstract idea of 1 + 1, is not 1 or more than 1. Memory is based on accumulating. Experience is the accumulation of many independent elements compounded within simultaneous range AND then accumulated by the one who experiences. If accumulating is a natural part of us, then from where did this "intent to gather" spring or could have sprung? I am looking foward to hearing all the juicy and meaty responses, I have come to expect and enjoy from this little group which accumulated under our noses... Sammi Na Boodie () ps. If the brain accumulates, then what would be the extension of accumulating the mind should be able to posess?

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

07-03-2002, 04:34 AM	#2
Mr. Sammi Banned Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Montr�al Posts: 367	To think of it, I seem to be accumulating information in my brain, at a constant rate, through the sensory apparatus I posess, seemingly from outside of us. To think of it, to be able to accumulate, the accumulator has to be able to (1) accumulate things and (2) something must be available through not-accumulating. This would seem a clear implication for each thing accumulated there was the very same thing which was disposessed elsewhere. To bring the point closer to home, in order to accumulate, there must be a donor, a giver, something which will end up being missed or nearly missed, so the accumulator can accumulate. I can then say we accumulate information that is outside of us. The carriers of information in the world constantly allow us to accumulate this information within our head, by providing the information. Does this lead me to say that a fundamental activity of the brain is to accumulate information outside of the brain. In doing so the brain must posess a native function of accumulation. Sammi Na Boodie ()

07-03-2002, 04:56 AM	#3
The Messiah Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Port Elizabeth, South Africa Posts: 70	Do you know how information is stored in the brain?

07-04-2002, 05:42 AM	#4
Mr. Sammi Banned Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Montr�al Posts: 367	Accumulation is all about in the brain. There is so much evidence of it that it is impossible not to give accumulation its proper treatment. I find it remarkable how the body and brain accumulates mass. Normally we call this type of accumulation growing. A concept with which most of you may be familiar. Growing must be seen as accumulation with parameters. When enough accumulation is obtained, which must be seen as a treshold of this type of accumulation, the elements which previously accumulated now seem to have stopped their accumulation practices. It is obvious the treshold of accumulation practices is passed on from generation to generation via the sperm/egg combination. But what does this "accumulation" tell us of bodily life apart from mental life. What would such an element of philosophy give us of value which would cause an improvment in the condition of life? It is no great lie that the body accumulates fat, This is as obvious to a two year old that cries "mommy look at that fat lady with that fine man". Basically we must look at the natural tresholds of accumulation in relation to "intelligent tresholds" of accumulation. Intelligent tresholds merly signify using abstraction in relation to reality in order to gain benefit while within the reality. Can we now say, please do not eat too much. Please do not accumulate too much experience without rest, please do not accumulate bad friends since this may veer your reality off into the treshold of life (death). Does anyone agree, that I never need to know how information is stored in the brain, in order to derive this fundamental of the brain which is clearly accumulation. Sammi Na Boodie ()

07-05-2002, 05:05 AM	#6
Mr. Sammi Banned Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Montr�al Posts: 367	emphyrio, this is philosophy, not a quest for attention. My thoughts about accumulation IS in direct relationship to fundamentals. I notice quite a number of flaws in your argument, since you use the word stored, and fail to see the accumulative section in storing. Again based on evidence, visual evidence, the human does accumulate, and it is absulutely unnecessary to use MRI, or any scientific method to deduce this, OTHER than simple reasoning. Accumulation in humans was deduced from visual interpretation of human life. The philosophical basis of this is reason. Seeing accumulation does not interest you much, I do not really expect a reply. Thanks all the same for the effort, and do remember you did accumulate since you last read. The human mind stands greatly before science. I think it was the human mind that invented science. How could have science invented itself? Additionally, I believe how and if people respond is crucial to the value of a topic. This leads to the conclusion that a topic of little or no value will eventually become EXTINCT. Sammi Na Boodie () [ July 05, 2002: Message edited by: Sammi ]</p>

07-10-2002, 07:18 AM	#7
Keith Russell Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Overland Park, Kansas Posts: 1,336	Greetings: By 'accumulation', do you perhaps mean 'integration'? We don't remember every instance of 'blue' we've experienced. We distill the concept 'blue' and the memory of all the specific essentials of each occurance of 'blue' is not retained in memory. Yes, we can--and do--remember certain instances of 'blue'; a blue dress, our blue dream car, etc. But, most concepts retained in consciousness are the result of integration of principles, and deletion of specifics. Do you agree? Keith.

07-10-2002, 09:20 AM	#8
Mr. Sammi Banned Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Montr�al Posts: 367	Perhaps integration is 1 sample of accumulation. Although the accumulation of sensory samples and perhaps sensory patterns end up as some recallable memories sometimes, where would the unrecallable end up? Residing as sensory non-patterns? Is it still floating around in the head perhaps to be dreamt out, OR does it exit through the ears OR is there an unknown brain function which dissipates "non-integrated" data VIA some very high frequency modulators? All I can say philosophically is all the sensory data accumulates in the head. Science can show the rest unless some preponderous reason steps into mind to define the accumulated non-integrated. I use non-integrated as the logical opposite of what you refer to as integrated. * * * I see integration, as you put it, up in the hierarchy, and I must say you have a very well expressed term. The opposite of accumulation is dispensing. To accumulate must necessarily have implied dispensing. To dispense here means accumulation elsewhere AND note the function of enduring the dispensing before the accumulation commences. Except perhaps in dual-state to N-state transitions where accumulating and dispensing are simultaneous(no state has to endure the other state's transition before its own transition can occur). How would you see integration in this light. Yes within reason, concepts accumulated must be the dispensing, as a result of integration of principles (not sure I fully understand this word in philosophy) and perhaps a few other accumulated patterns, of which one should be the denial of specifics. Sammi Na Boodie ()

07-15-2002, 04:46 AM	#9
Mr. Sammi Banned Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Montr�al Posts: 367	How are we doing with our thinking caps on this one? Should I post the conclusion... Do we really need this information accumulated in our brains so it can be integrated in our minds,or should it just be dismissed into oblivion. Sammi Na Boodie ()

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.