Notices
Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 100 of 674
Like Tree44Likes

Thread: Free will?

  1. #1 Free will? 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    England
    Posts
    60
    do we realy have free will?

    the more I find out about psychology the more I learn that all emotions and everything about us is decided by our genes and memes.

    so do we realy have free will or are all our decisions controlled by our genes and memes?


    'if one man beleaves in fairies its called madness
    if one million men beleave in faries its called religion'- Richard Dawkings
    (but i think he was quoting someone when he said it...but who cares)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard spuriousmonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,191
    How can you have free will if every thought and action is determined by a limited structure that allows for a limited range of output and input.


    "Kill them all and let God sort them out."

    - Arnaud Amalric

    http://spuriousforums.com/index.php
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Sophomore Skiyk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    176
    True
    A biophysicist talks physics to the biologists and biology to the physicists, but then he meets another biophysicist, they just discuss women.
    http://www.gifs.net/Animation11/Scie...inking_eye.gif
    E-Mail - skiyk@hotmail.com
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    England
    Posts
    60
    so, we have an illusion of free will, but we dont realy...wow kinda depressing

    if i have no free will, how am i held responsible for my actions?
    I had a thought, Totaly irellivant, All we are is our brain, the entire rest of our body is just there to keep the brain alive, if we were to keep the brain alive with artificail methods we would technicaly be immortal! dont be shy to call me a nut-job, it was just a random thought
    'if one man beleaves in fairies its called madness
    if one million men beleave in faries its called religion'- Richard Dawkings
    (but i think he was quoting someone when he said it...but who cares)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard i_feel_tiredsleepy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    2,256
    We have a limited structure, however this structure is capable of a near infinitesimal amount of different actions. As you stand in one place consider the actions you could take, the amount of small and large movements, the lack of movements and the like. A limited amount of choices is not a lack of choice, therefore we have freewill within that context.

    The question of whether the choice we made is predertermined by past experiences and our genetics is a better question.

    Go read some Existentialist philosophy, they never tire of writing about free will.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Sophomore Skiyk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    176
    I believe we have free will.

    Will you choose the road less traveled?

    Is glass half empty or half full?

    We make variations of the choices every day and many of us make different choices.
    A biophysicist talks physics to the biologists and biology to the physicists, but then he meets another biophysicist, they just discuss women.
    http://www.gifs.net/Animation11/Scie...inking_eye.gif
    E-Mail - skiyk@hotmail.com
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    I live in Bertrand Russells teapot!
    Posts
    902
    Quote Originally Posted by Skiyk
    I believe we have free will.

    Will you choose the road less traveled?

    Is glass half empty or half full?

    We make variations of the choices every day and many of us make different choices.
    Yup

    It's good practice to always remember you have a choice and to remember what those choices are and not to run on auto-pilot.

    Oh and ignore anyone who begins their sentences with....

    "You should......." or
    "You shouldn't........."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Sophomore Skiyk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    176
    Or you will or you will not
    A biophysicist talks physics to the biologists and biology to the physicists, but then he meets another biophysicist, they just discuss women.
    http://www.gifs.net/Animation11/Scie...inking_eye.gif
    E-Mail - skiyk@hotmail.com
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    I live in Bertrand Russells teapot!
    Posts
    902
    Quote Originally Posted by Skiyk
    Or you will or you will not
    Yeah

    And people that think they know all about you and know it all and know everything that's good an bad for you.

    I always screw my eyes shut, cover my ears and stick out my tongue.

    Guaranteed five minutes after i have opened my eyes they will have left the building
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Sophomore Skiyk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    176
    And if you did that, probably ran out of the country.
    A biophysicist talks physics to the biologists and biology to the physicists, but then he meets another biophysicist, they just discuss women.
    http://www.gifs.net/Animation11/Scie...inking_eye.gif
    E-Mail - skiyk@hotmail.com
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Bachelors Degree
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    414
    Some theories claim that free will is an illusion as has been mentioned before. If time travel is possible and the theory of extra dimensions is false, there is no possible way you could go back in time and kill yourself because what's done is done. Basically everything is already written, we can't do whatever we want to do because anything we do has already been programmed into the massive computer that is time and space.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    WYSIWYG Moderator marnixR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cardiff, Wales
    Posts
    5,810
    Quote Originally Posted by BumFluff
    ... If time travel is possible ...
    big if - imo, if time travel was possible, time travelers would be here by now
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard spuriousmonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,191
    Quote Originally Posted by i_feel_tiredsleepy
    We have a limited structure, however this structure is capable of a near infinitesimal amount of different actions.
    No it isn't.

    The structure of each individual brain is very determined and the result of its natural history. The output is very predictable, if you would be able to interpret such a complex structure. However, you cannot confuse a lack of methodology to do so with this structure being capable of infinitesimal amount of interactions.

    In summary,

    First of all, the possible interactions are finite.

    Secondly, the interactions of the brain depend entirely on the network structure present in the brain.

    Thirdly, the structural network of the brain is determined by a genetic component, the developmental history, and subsequent modifications due to environmental influences, which could be input, drugs etc.


    As for choice. Making a choice is not identical to having free will. A choice is merely an input with two or more options and one outcome. Whether you think about the options or not, the outcome is determined to a few possible scenarios. The ones that are allowed for by your brain. You cannot come up with any option that falls outside the possibilities of your limited brain, which eliminates free will from the equation, since you are a prisoner of your brain.
    "Kill them all and let God sort them out."

    - Arnaud Amalric

    http://spuriousforums.com/index.php
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    I live in Bertrand Russells teapot!
    Posts
    902
    Quote Originally Posted by spuriousmonkey
    Quote Originally Posted by i_feel_tiredsleepy
    We have a limited structure, however this structure is capable of a near infinitesimal amount of different actions.
    No it isn't.

    The structure of each individual brain is very determined and the result of its natural history. The output is very predictable, if you would be able to interpret such a complex structure. However, you cannot confuse a lack of methodology to do so with this structure being capable of infinitesimal amount of interactions.

    In summary,

    First of all, the possible interactions are finite.

    Secondly, the interactions of the brain depend entirely on the network structure present in the brain.

    Thirdly, the structural network of the brain is determined by a genetic component, the developmental history, and subsequent modifications due to environmental influences, which could be input, drugs etc.


    As for choice. Making a choice is not identical to having free will. A choice is merely an input with two or more options and one outcome. Whether you think about the options or not, the outcome is determined to a few possible scenarios. The ones that are allowed for by your brain. You cannot come up with any option that falls outside the possibilities of your limited brain, which eliminates free will from the equation, since you are a prisoner of your brain.
    Yes we all have the basic structure of brain BUT it all boils down to HOW you use it and HOW MUCH you use it.

    If you use your brain to a maximum capacity and make as many connections as possible then surely you are better armed to have a better scope of choices to choose from.

    For example somebody proficient in the game of chess and pre-planning maneuvers and trained in seeing strategy is better armed at making better decisions than a person who spends most of their time watching day time TV?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Forum Sophomore Skiyk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    176
    Yeah, true. Hitler was highly intelligent and he didn't use his brain well because...well...he was mad.
    A biophysicist talks physics to the biologists and biology to the physicists, but then he meets another biophysicist, they just discuss women.
    http://www.gifs.net/Animation11/Scie...inking_eye.gif
    E-Mail - skiyk@hotmail.com
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard spuriousmonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,191
    Nobody uses his brain very well. It uses us.
    "Kill them all and let God sort them out."

    - Arnaud Amalric

    http://spuriousforums.com/index.php
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    I live in Bertrand Russells teapot!
    Posts
    902
    Quote Originally Posted by spuriousmonkey
    Nobody uses his brain very well. It uses us.
    I don't think i agree with that spurious.

    certainly there are many factors where our brains and it's chemistry can influence our way of thinking and brain functions.

    But i don't think we are helpless to that and i think we can influence our brains in lots of ways too.

    Do we attempt to take control of our brains or do we let our brains take control of us?

    Interesting......i will ponder on this and do some research.......
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Forum Sophomore Skiyk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    176
    I think we do have free will. That's why all of us are different.
    A biophysicist talks physics to the biologists and biology to the physicists, but then he meets another biophysicist, they just discuss women.
    http://www.gifs.net/Animation11/Scie...inking_eye.gif
    E-Mail - skiyk@hotmail.com
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    England
    Posts
    60
    saying our brain uses us, but surely we are our brain. our brain is what makes us, us.
    even if my body continued living, without my brain I wouldnt be me.
    'if one man beleaves in fairies its called madness
    if one million men beleave in faries its called religion'- Richard Dawkings
    (but i think he was quoting someone when he said it...but who cares)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard spuriousmonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,191
    Quote Originally Posted by Skiyk
    I think we do have free will. That's why all of us are different.
    We are all different because none of have the same natural history.
    "Kill them all and let God sort them out."

    - Arnaud Amalric

    http://spuriousforums.com/index.php
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    The Doctor Quantime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    4,546
    Quote Originally Posted by spuriousmonkey
    Quote Originally Posted by Skiyk
    I think we do have free will. That's why all of us are different.
    We are all different because none of have the same natural history.
    Thats spuriousmonkeys philosiphy.

    Mine is:

    We are all different because we are. (x)

    I don't think we have free will. Think back to when you did something, you did it, so thats what you were going to do anyway. You could not have changed it.
    "If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe". - Carl Sagan
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope zinjanthropos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Driving in my car
    Posts
    4,988
    Here is how I see it. There can be no interference or influence from a deity for true free will to exist.

    That doesn't necessarily mean God doesn't exist. If He does exist then in order for you to have true free will you must accept that God has never ever made an attempt to let us know He is there.

    Arguing for or against God, building religions, writing bibles, building churches or whatever religious connection you want to make is a product of someone saying Yes, He exists. Religion is a product of a free will. Of course none of what you read is divine but at least someone made an effort to make it look so. Perfectly normal in a free will society where there is no influence from an Almighty.

    Of course the easiest solution for a lot of man's religious problems could be solved if we all just recognized the only thing we can do in a true free will world is to say yes, no or maybe to a god. That 's it. Nothing more required. No penalty for guessing. There is absolutely no need to expound on anything religious because it can only be man talking since we simply do not know if God exists .

    This makes arguing both sides a colossal waste of time but it is free will in action. Our true free will is not a 'do as God says or else' choice. Either yes , no or maybe is the most logical answer an intelligent being can make when they have true free will. No need to go any further.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard spuriousmonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,191
    To test whether you have free will is quite easy.


    step 1. Imagine a language you have never spoken before. Let's say Cantonese
    step 2. Find a conversational partner fluent in this language.
    Step 3. Apply your free will and decide you want to speak Cantonese Fluently.
    Step 4. Examine the face of your conversational partner.


    There are at least 3 scenarios that could occur.

    A. He laughs. You just told a funny joke in Cantonese or he is amused by your poor performance in Cantonese.
    B. He looks surprised. He is amazed you speak cantonese so well, or alternatively that you don't speak it at all.
    C. He talks back to you in Cantonese. You understand perfectly. Congratulations! you have free will. You don't understand a thing. Congratulations you do not have free will.

    Only C will determine whether you have free will or not. Keep trying the experiment till you find the response C.
    "Kill them all and let God sort them out."

    - Arnaud Amalric

    http://spuriousforums.com/index.php
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    HTM fan
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    227
    I think this is a question about whether we are conscious or not, unless we're just along for the ride (as any of the arguments against free will imply), but I'm going to ignore that. I'm not a rock, I do percieve things. If we didn't have consciousness, none of us would actually percieve what is happening. We'd be more like computers talking to one another.
    There is no "extra sauce". I think it is an emergent property of some sort. Maybe computers are conscious to the extent to which they can process data without having seen it before, and the same is true for us. We have 100 billion neurons. If each has 1,000 synapsis, that's 100 trillion synapsis, which is far more complex than computers. If consciousness is an emergent property, then it makes sense for us to be so much more conscious than computers seem to be.
    It's not good to think of yourself as not having free will, because you won't blame yourself for anything you do (even if we don't have free will.)
    "It is the ability to make predictions about the future that is the crux of intelligence."
    -Jeff Hawkins.
    For example, you can predict that 3+5=8. You can predict what sequence of muscle commands you should generate during a conversation, or whether an object is a desk or a chair. The brain is very complicated, but that is essentially how intelligence works. Instinct, emotions, and behavior are somewhat seperate.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    Even if genes, memes and other internal factors inside a person completely control decisions, it's still free will because it's self-contained within the person.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope sculptor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,211
    IMHO
    "free will" is a fantasy
    inculcation into any culture, and language must necessarily equate to operant conditioning.

    free will therefore becomes an ideal which has little basis in reality
    much like voting for president, can we chose anyone? or is our free vote constrained by the system in place?

    much like putting fleas in a jar with a lid
    they will spend awhile jumping up and hitting the lid, then, after awhile, they will jump just short of the lid even when the lid is removed.

    How high, really can your conditioned mind jump?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    HTM fan
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    227
    Quote Originally Posted by sculptor View Post
    IMHO
    "free will" is a fantasy
    inculcation into any culture, and language must necessarily equate to operant conditioning.

    free will therefore becomes an ideal which has little basis in reality
    much like voting for president, can we chose anyone? or is our free vote constrained by the system in place?

    much like putting fleas in a jar with a lid
    they will spend awhile jumping up and hitting the lid, then, after awhile, they will jump just short of the lid even when the lid is removed.

    How high, really can your conditioned mind jump?
    If we didn't have consciousness, then I would agree that we don't have free will, but we are conscious, because otherwise perception wouldn't exist. If we are conscious but don't have free will, then it would be like you're experiencing everything, but having no control over anything.
    I agree that what we do is entirely based on the structure of the brain, but the above stuff makes me think free will is some sort of emergent property which is impossible to understand at our current level of knowledge.
    "It is the ability to make predictions about the future that is the crux of intelligence."
    -Jeff Hawkins.
    For example, you can predict that 3+5=8. You can predict what sequence of muscle commands you should generate during a conversation, or whether an object is a desk or a chair. The brain is very complicated, but that is essentially how intelligence works. Instinct, emotions, and behavior are somewhat seperate.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    715
    Quote Originally Posted by NNet View Post
    If we didn't have consciousness, then I would agree that we don't have free will, but we are conscious, because otherwise perception wouldn't exist. If we are conscious but don't have free will, then it would be like you're experiencing everything, but having no control over anything.
    Hi! Your Comment is very apt! I applaud it and will add some thoughts from elsewhere:

    Indeed its true that any concept depends on its definition BUT there are two kinds of definitions. Rational definitions and Ostentative definitions. I consider ostentative definitions to be foundational...Primary...since ALL definitions on pain of circularity cant be rational!
    Science begins with some ostentative definitions (ideally as few as possible) enabling us to measure and quantify objects...to this we add principles (based on the principle of there being invariances...or more familiarly: causality) and Scientific Activity can begin!

    Free will is a necessary cause of free thought: Unless the thought is not freely willed from its beginning to its end then its not free
    (it is somehow forced on us)! And the same with actions since actions are caused by thoughts. So whenever a thought is formed it is either formed by a free will or an unfree will. In the latter case the thought is an experience (or perhaps the expressions "experienced fact" or "observation" is more exact in English) Please first observe the difference between observations and other thoughts... then lets finish this:

    Any rational definition of "free will"and "unfree will" must not contradict the ostentative definition...if this occurs then the rational definition is inconsistent and not valid! And...eh...If I didnt leave anything out then this is all there is to it! .
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #29  
    HTM fan
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    227
    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdV View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by NNet View Post
    If we didn't have consciousness, then I would agree that we don't have free will, but we are conscious, because otherwise perception wouldn't exist. If we are conscious but don't have free will, then it would be like you're experiencing everything, but having no control over anything.
    Hi! Your Comment is very apt! I applaud it and will add some thoughts from elsewhere:

    Indeed its true that any concept depends on its definition BUT there are two kinds of definitions. Rational definitions and Ostentative definitions. I consider ostentative definitions to be foundational...Primary...since ALL definitions on pain of circularity cant be rational!
    Science begins with some ostentative definitions (ideally as few as possible) enabling us to measure and quantify objects...to this we add principles (based on the principle of there being invariances...or more familiarly: causality) and Scientific Activity can begin!

    Free will is a necessary cause of free thought: Unless the thought is not freely willed from its beginning to its end then its not free
    (it is somehow forced on us)! And the same with actions since actions are caused by thoughts. So whenever a thought is formed it is either formed by a free will or an unfree will. In the latter case the thought is an experience (or perhaps the expressions "experienced fact" or "observation" is more exact in English) Please first observe the difference between observations and other thoughts... then lets finish this:

    Any rational definition of "free will"and "unfree will" must not contradict the ostentative definition...if this occurs then the rational definition is inconsistent and not valid! And...eh...If I didnt leave anything out then this is all there is to it! .
    Thanks
    That definetly gives me something to ponder I'm not sure if you mean that some decisions are the product of free will, and some are not. If so, I agree with that.
    I could see your idea that the combination creates unfree will. Humans have basic driving forces which we use to form goals, which is via instinct parts of the brain (e.g. becoming happy and some ethical instinct, I think.) If that's the case, then I guess we wouldn't have free will, but stilll free thought. That's kind of confusing, but reasonable.
    Last edited by NNet; December 12th, 2012 at 08:57 PM.
    "It is the ability to make predictions about the future that is the crux of intelligence."
    -Jeff Hawkins.
    For example, you can predict that 3+5=8. You can predict what sequence of muscle commands you should generate during a conversation, or whether an object is a desk or a chair. The brain is very complicated, but that is essentially how intelligence works. Instinct, emotions, and behavior are somewhat seperate.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  31. #30  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope sculptor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,211
    I'm confused by that word "Ostentative"
    as in declaritive
    .......................
    Reply With Quote  
     

  32. #31  
    HTM fan
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    227
    Quote Originally Posted by sculptor View Post
    I'm confused by that word "Ostentative"
    as in declaritive
    .......................
    I think he/she means basic things which cannot be proven, like postulates. For example, 1+1=2 cannot be proven (I think), but it is accepted by everyone.
    @sigurdV, in the future it will be possible to prove how the brain works through reason instead of fundamental facts, although I don't think that changes anything.
    "It is the ability to make predictions about the future that is the crux of intelligence."
    -Jeff Hawkins.
    For example, you can predict that 3+5=8. You can predict what sequence of muscle commands you should generate during a conversation, or whether an object is a desk or a chair. The brain is very complicated, but that is essentially how intelligence works. Instinct, emotions, and behavior are somewhat seperate.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  33. #32  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    715
    Hi Sculptor Hi NNet: Is it the word in itself? Its standard...I hate the sound of it the mo0ment I find an adequate replacement ill drop it! Whats confusing IN the concept? U point towards the object and tell me its name...thats ostentative. Its Understandin by Experiencing (Ostentativity) (Aaarrrrggh!) in contrast to understanding by explanation (rationality).

    About decisions: yes i think u c my thinking. If a thought is formed by free will its a fantacy that may be a picture of reality but need not and probably isnt ...so it cant be predicted (unless you are in the position to see the workings of the mind (but I think I have a hidden ace there)) but if the will is unfree theres an object to be experienced so theres no way the will can be free and deviate from the object (of course theres degrees: a charicature is corresponding to the object but there was a lot of free will consumed by the artist.)

    Also: what you call a decision is what I think of as thought that gives the body the instruction for how to acti ...
    so on that level you say that actions are willed events and events are unwilled actions/events/whatever. Mind you the formatting idea is only a few days old and nomenclature is sord of ostentative rather than rational.
    So I admire anyone understanding me so early in developing the terms of the system.
    Last edited by sigurdV; December 13th, 2012 at 05:39 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  34. #33  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope sculptor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,211
    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdV View Post
    Hi Sculptor Hi NNet: Is it the word in itself? Its standard...I hate the sound of it the mo0ment I find an adequate replacement ill drop it! Whats confusing IN the concept? U point towards the object and tell me its name...thats ostentative. Its Understandin by Experiencing (Ostentativity) (Aaarrrrggh!) in contrast to understanding by explanation (rationality).

    About decisions: yes i think u c my thinking. If a thought is formed by free will its a fantacy that may be a picture of reality but need not and probably isnt ...so it cant be predicted (unless you are in the position to see the workings of the mind (but I think I have a hidden ace there)) but if the will is unfree theres an object to be experienced so theres no way the will can be free and deviate from the object (of course theres degrees: a charicature is corresponding to the object but there was a lot of free will consumed by the artist.)

    Also: what you call a decision is what I think of as thought that gives the body the instruction for how to acti ...
    so on that level you say that actions are willed events and events are unwilled actions/events/whatever. Mind you the formatting idea is only a few days old and nomenclature is sord of ostentative rather than rational.
    So I admire anyone understanding me so early in developing the terms of the system.
    Sig
    when i was but a lad, my mother set a webster's unabridged dictionary down in front of me and suggested that I read it---------wowie zowie--
    big sucker---the word ain't there, so I hadda ask--------as I understand it you are using the word "ostentative"(thanx, a new one for me) to seperate thought concerning real-concrete items/experiential, as seperated from "the dream world, where the parts of the mind not constrained to concrete item based thought is free to wander and make associations not constrained by experience.
    The subconscious, the superconscious, the supraconscious mind?

    I have long suspected that the constraints/aegis and onus placed upon the conscious mind preclude free will, and blind us to conceptions not preceeded by perceptions, which are limited by conceptions.
    Beasts that must be tamed before the mind can be said to truely have free will.
    Last edited by sculptor; December 13th, 2012 at 11:43 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  35. #34  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    Quote Originally Posted by NNet View Post
    If we didn't have consciousness, then I would agree that we don't have free will, but we are conscious, because otherwise perception wouldn't exist. If we are conscious but don't have free will, then it would be like you're experiencing everything, but having no control over anything.
    I agree that what we do is entirely based on the structure of the brain, but the above stuff makes me think free will is some sort of emergent property which is impossible to understand at our current level of knowledge.
    Even emergent property doesn't' mean it's some sort of separate thing free from what ever deterministic factors exist regardless of how much is feels that way to us. It's still nothing more than part of our brain, and thus uniquely ours; hence free will. Your brain is free to make its choices...your brain does...its all you you you. There is no conflict between determinism and free will.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  36. #35  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    715
    Quote Originally Posted by sculptor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdV View Post
    Hi Sculptor Hi NNet: Is it the word in itself? Its standard...I hate the sound of it the mo0ment I find an adequate replacement ill drop it! Whats confusing IN the concept? U point towards the object and tell me its name...thats ostentative. Its Understandin by Experiencing (Ostentativity) (Aaarrrrggh!) in contrast to understanding by explanation (rationality).

    About decisions: yes i think u c my thinking. If a thought is formed by free will its a fantacy that may be a picture of reality but need not and probably isnt ...so it cant be predicted (unless you are in the position to see the workings of the mind (but I think I have a hidden ace there)) but if the will is unfree theres an object to be experienced so theres no way the will can be free and deviate from the object (of course theres degrees: a charicature is corresponding to the object but there was a lot of free will consumed by the artist.)

    Also: what you call a decision is what I think of as thought that gives the body the instruction for how to acti ...
    so on that level you say that actions are willed events and events are unwilled actions/events/whatever. Mind you the formatting idea is only a few days old and nomenclature is sord of ostentative rather than rational.
    So I admire anyone understanding me so early in developing the terms of the system.
    Sig
    when i was but a lad, my mother set a webster's unabridged dictionary down in front of me and suggested that I read it---------wowie zowie--
    big sucker---the word ain't there, so I hadda ask--------as I understand it you are using the word "ostentative"(thanx, a new one for me) to seperate thought concerning real-concrete items/experiential, as seperated from "the dream world, where the parts of the mind not constrained to concrete item based thought is free to wander and make associations not constrained by experience.
    The subconscious, the superconscious, the supraconscious mind?

    I have long suspected that the constraints/aegis and onus placed upon the conscious mind preclude free will, and blind us to conceptions not preceeded by perceptions, which are limited by conceptions.
    Beasts that must be tamed before the mind can be said to truely have free will.
    You point towards an intended destination of mine: The Unconscious...What is it? How come IT controls US (giving us nightmares and extra energy if we need it etc etc ) Is it the real dirigent of the brain? What can it do...that we are not aware of it doing? Is my nightmare theme: I think Ill compose a piece for violins and piano.(yes im leaving guitarplaying I prefere notes
    Reply With Quote  
     

  37. #36  
    HTM fan
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    227
    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdV View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by sculptor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdV View Post
    Hi Sculptor Hi NNet: Is it the word in itself? Its standard...I hate the sound of it the mo0ment I find an adequate replacement ill drop it! Whats confusing IN the concept? U point towards the object and tell me its name...thats ostentative. Its Understandin by Experiencing (Ostentativity) (Aaarrrrggh!) in contrast to understanding by explanation (rationality).

    About decisions: yes i think u c my thinking. If a thought is formed by free will its a fantacy that may be a picture of reality but need not and probably isnt ...so it cant be predicted (unless you are in the position to see the workings of the mind (but I think I have a hidden ace there)) but if the will is unfree theres an object to be experienced so theres no way the will can be free and deviate from the object (of course theres degrees: a charicature is corresponding to the object but there was a lot of free will consumed by the artist.)

    Also: what you call a decision is what I think of as thought that gives the body the instruction for how to acti ...
    so on that level you say that actions are willed events and events are unwilled actions/events/whatever. Mind you the formatting idea is only a few days old and nomenclature is sord of ostentative rather than rational.
    So I admire anyone understanding me so early in developing the terms of the system.
    Sig
    when i was but a lad, my mother set a webster's unabridged dictionary down in front of me and suggested that I read it---------wowie zowie--
    big sucker---the word ain't there, so I hadda ask--------as I understand it you are using the word "ostentative"(thanx, a new one for me) to seperate thought concerning real-concrete items/experiential, as seperated from "the dream world, where the parts of the mind not constrained to concrete item based thought is free to wander and make associations not constrained by experience.
    The subconscious, the superconscious, the supraconscious mind?

    I have long suspected that the constraints/aegis and onus placed upon the conscious mind preclude free will, and blind us to conceptions not preceeded by perceptions, which are limited by conceptions.
    Beasts that must be tamed before the mind can be said to truely have free will.
    You point towards an intended destination of mine: The Unconscious...What is it? How come IT controls US (giving us nightmares and extra energy if we need it etc etc ) Is it the real dirigent of the brain? What can it do...that we are not aware of it doing? Is my nightmare theme: I think Ill compose a piece for violins and piano.(yes im leaving guitarplaying I prefere notes
    I didn't really understand your post replying to my previous post. Everything I've said here is based on my knowledge of Jeff Hawkins work and some ideas I have about it. Although most things I've said are based on inference rather than observation, what I've said does make sense. (To me, so far.)
    The unconscous mind is ROM-based, primarily. Basically, thoughts which aren't your own but are rather ROM-type, meaning a,c,d->34, g->87, etc.
    Emotions are part of the unconscious mind. We can control them, but only by ignoring/paying attention to them. Unlike instinct (the above), emotions change how the rest of the brain works via chemicals distributed to all or most of the brain. These chemicals do simple things, but create emotions. I have a thread in the hypothesis section if you're interested in understanding my exact ideas.
    "It is the ability to make predictions about the future that is the crux of intelligence."
    -Jeff Hawkins.
    For example, you can predict that 3+5=8. You can predict what sequence of muscle commands you should generate during a conversation, or whether an object is a desk or a chair. The brain is very complicated, but that is essentially how intelligence works. Instinct, emotions, and behavior are somewhat seperate.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  38. #37  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope sculptor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,211
    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdV View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by sculptor View Post
    The subconscious, the superconscious, the supraconscious mind?
    I have long suspected that the constraints/aegis and onus placed upon the conscious mind preclude free will, and blind us to conceptions not preceeded by perceptions, which are limited by conceptions.
    Beasts that must be tamed before the mind can be said to truely have free will.
    You point towards an intended destination of mine: The Unconscious...What is it? How come IT controls US (giving us nightmares and extra energy if we need it etc etc ) Is it the real dirigent of the brain? What can it do...that we are not aware of it doing? Is my nightmare theme: I think Ill compose a piece for violins and piano.(yes im leaving guitarplaying I prefere notes
    don't quit the guitar

    I really do not know what (small?) percentage of the brain is used by the conscious mind.
    That being said:
    I suspect that the bulk of brain dedicated to mind is not of/for the conscious mind, but rather for aspects of the mind not well understood.
    Long ago, i chose to use other prefixes than un, or sub for that part of the mind, and tried super, supra, maybe even epi
    superconscious, supraconscious, epiconscious...etc...

    As you suggested, perhaps that is the part of the "mind" that comes closest to having free will.
    If so, then a merging of the two(3-4-5?) minds should allow more freedom for the conscious mind?

    I used to have a lot of "nightmares" some very real, and some very symbolic. The "very real" seeming ones often prepared me for real world events in the surroundings of people and materials i had become part of. As though, I were dreaming solutions for problems that had not yet presented themselves.
    Ofttimes, simular problems did eventually present themselves, and my nightmares had prepared me for them, so the solutions came readily.
    The more symbolic ones, though much more rare, were oft repeated, and I began to analyse and learn from them, until, i looked forward to having them again............(sadly) shortly after I had learned all I could from them, they never came back) (sigh) like old friends from whom you have learned, departed forevermore.

    I have tried lucid dreaming, and directed dreaming, and met with some small success---mostly with short naps rather than night sleeps.
    Often, with those and meditation, I have seen patterns and solutions and connections that simplify whatever it is that I am doing.

    When I sculpt "I worry the damned thing to death"---looking and thinking and second guessing my decisions and struggling every second, minute, hour and inch of the way........then somewhere in the process, I quit thinking with the conscious mind and marvelous amounts of work get done in very short timespans--------often, when modeling clay, I will run out of warmed and softened clay, and have to pause while more clay is prepared, or not notice time, and have to be reminded by the model.--------those times without the internal dialogue, are really the ultimate in creativity.

    So, which "mind is better"
    or are they all equals, each with different strengths and weaknesses?
    sigurdV likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  39. #38  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    715
    Quote Originally Posted by NNet View Post
    I didn't really understand your post replying to my previous post. Everything I've said here is based on my knowledge of Jeff Hawkins work and some ideas I have about it. Although most things I've said are based on inference rather than observation, what I've said does make sense. (To me, so far.)
    The unconscous mind is ROM-based, primarily. Basically, thoughts which aren't your own but are rather ROM-type, meaning a,c,d->34, g->87, etc.
    Emotions are part of the unconscious mind. We can control them, but only by ignoring/paying attention to them. Unlike instinct (the above), emotions change how the rest of the brain works via chemicals distributed to all or most of the brain. These chemicals do simple things, but create emotions. I have a thread in the hypothesis section if you're interested in understanding my exact ideas.
    Whats new? We dont understand each other? Understanding is in our case a question of communication:

    Thesis: Successful communication needs a shared media a shared logic and a shared manner.


    Only the first part is fulfilled here. If you look at your text youll realise its filled with expressions belonging to computer expertise...
    I would like to see a translation of your text into ordinary english. Im sort of fighting against un-necessary use of formalism:

    Its convenient for people working closely together to develop a variation of ordinary language to facilitate matters...not aware that this not only knits the group together but creates difficulties to communicate with people outside the group. Its been noted that Science is compartmentalised and that its no longer possible for anyone to grasp science as a whole... Hmm, excuse me, but isnt it obvious WHY this is the case?

    S
    o thank you for your willingness to share your ideas, and I am interested in them but ill bet that I wont be able to understand much of what you have written! Not because we are stupid: its a Cultural Distance between us!

    So unless we (all) sharpen our ability to speed up the process of finding common ground, Im afraid that the speed of Scientific progress will decline... Or is steadily declining already: I also bet you that nobody thought of a way of measuring the phenomenon Im describing! But... "Science IS progressing" youll probably object, if so: Ill object that the number of scientists (i believe) has inclined during the period and that the speed has been high up to some undefined point in the twentieth century (1900-2000), it might take a while before this Babel Tower Effect will be painfully obvious. (Sorry Im digressing.)

    Ill end with the suggestion that we should NOT immediately enter into the difficult questions, however eager we are to attack them...perhaps we should do the opposite for a while: How about a cup of tea and a friendly chat about the weather? (Kidding just a little)

    Actually I would be VERY interested in reading a short but accurate mini treatise in ordinary layman language summarising your research! Are you able to produce?

    In order to give you a better picture of myself:
    https://dl.dropbox.com/u/103782929/IMG_1084.MOV

    PS:Could you tell me more of the differences between emotions and instinct...I tend to identify them!
    Last edited by sigurdV; December 15th, 2012 at 04:33 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  40. #39  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    715
    Quote Originally Posted by sculptor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdV View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by sculptor View Post
    The subconscious, the superconscious, the supraconscious mind?
    I have long suspected that the constraints/aegis and onus placed upon the conscious mind preclude free will, and blind us to conceptions not preceeded by perceptions, which are limited by conceptions.
    Beasts that must be tamed before the mind can be said to truely have free will.
    You point towards an intended destination of mine: The Unconscious...What is it? How come IT controls US (giving us nightmares and extra energy if we need it etc etc ) Is it the real dirigent of the brain? What can it do...that we are not aware of it doing? Is my nightmare theme: I think Ill compose a piece for violins and piano.(yes im leaving guitarplaying I prefere notes
    don't quit the guitar

    I really do not know what (small?) percentage of the brain is used by the conscious mind.
    That being said:
    I suspect that the bulk of brain dedicated to mind is not of/for the conscious mind, but rather for aspects of the mind not well understood.
    Long ago, i chose to use other prefixes than un, or sub for that part of the mind, and tried super, supra, maybe even epi
    superconscious, supraconscious, epiconscious...etc...

    As you suggested, perhaps that is the part of the "mind" that comes closest to having free will.
    If so, then a merging of the two(3-4-5?) minds should allow more freedom for the conscious mind?
    Remember that my memory aint what it used to be: Short...now its even shorter.
    It seems i told you my free will strategy? Ill practice the skill of doing a short repeat:
    Let the opponent define what determines the free will! Proving theres no free will because of a b and c.
    Then say: Thanx just what I needed...
    The Mind consists of exactly a b and c. So now its proven that it is Mind that guarantees free will...
    If he then identifies further determining factors you repeat the process as long as needed
    Quote Originally Posted by sculptor View Post
    [I used to have a lot of "nightmares" some very real, and some very symbolic. The "very real" seeming ones often prepared me for real world events in the surroundings of people and materials i had become part of. As though, I were dreaming solutions for problems that had not yet presented themselves.
    Ofttimes, simular problems did eventually present themselves, and my nightmares had prepared me for them, so the solutions came readily.
    The more symbolic ones, though much more rare, were oft repeated, and I began to analyse and learn from them, until, i looked forward to having them again............(sadly) shortly after I had learned all I could from them, they never came back) (sigh) like old friends from whom you have learned, departed forevermore.

    I have tried lucid dreaming, and directed dreaming, and met with some small success---mostly with short naps rather than night sleeps.
    Often, with those and meditation, I have seen patterns and solutions and connections that simplify whatever it is that I am doing.

    When I sculpt "I worry the damned thing to death"---looking and thinking and second guessing my decisions and struggling every second, minute, hour and inch of the way........then somewhere in the process, I quit thinking with the conscious mind and marvelous amounts of work get done in very short timespans--------often, when modeling clay, I will run out of warmed and softened clay, and have to pause while more clay is prepared, or not notice time, and have to be reminded by the model.--------those times without the internal dialogue, are really the ultimate in creativity.

    So, which "mind is better"
    or are they all equals, each with different strengths and weaknesses?
    Maybe its us being artists (what is an artisan?) that made us synchronized in describing mind processes. Asking similar questions.

    Now WE MUST start defining terms for easier communication...Bright idea huh?

    I think it was Jung who introduced the concept of synchronisation... But whats missing is a closer look at the possible mechanisms: This reminds me of when I came across a thread discussing telepathy...they had been examining the mechanism "electromagnetic radiation"... And came to the (credible I thought) conclusion that telepathy could not use that mechanism ...and went on to declare that they had proven telepathy wasnt possible. We didnt become friends since I claimed that they never proved no other mechanism could be used by the possible but unproved phenomen "telepathy": NEVER tell the truth if you wanna get friends
    BTW did you ever understand my work in the foundations of Logic?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  41. #40  
    HTM fan
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    227
    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdV View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by NNet View Post
    I didn't really understand your post replying to my previous post. Everything I've said here is based on my knowledge of Jeff Hawkins work and some ideas I have about it. Although most things I've said are based on inference rather than observation, what I've said does make sense. (To me, so far.)
    The unconscous mind is ROM-based, primarily. Basically, thoughts which aren't your own but are rather ROM-type, meaning a,c,d->34, g->87, etc.
    Emotions are part of the unconscious mind. We can control them, but only by ignoring/paying attention to them. Unlike instinct (the above), emotions change how the rest of the brain works via chemicals distributed to all or most of the brain. These chemicals do simple things, but create emotions. I have a thread in the hypothesis section if you're interested in understanding my exact ideas.
    Whats new? We dont understand each other? Understanding is in our case a question of communication:

    Thesis: Successful communication needs a shared media a shared logic and a shared manner.


    Only the first part is fulfilled here. If you look at your text youll realise its filled with expressions belonging to computer expertise...
    I would like to see a translation of your text into ordinary english. Im sort of fighting against un-necessary use of formalism:

    Its convenient for people working closely together to develop a variation of ordinary language to facilitate matters...not aware that this not only knits the group together but creates difficulties to communicate with people outside the group. Its been noted that Science is compartmentalised and that its no longer possible for anyone to grasp science as a whole... Hmm, excuse me, but isnt it obvious WHY this is the case?

    S
    o thank you for your willingness to share your ideas, and I am interested in them but ill bet that I wont be able to understand much of what you have written! Not because we are stupid: its a Cultural Distance between us!

    So unless we (all) sharpen our ability to speed up the process of finding common ground, Im afraid that the speed of Scientific progress will decline... Or is steadily declining already: I also bet you that nobody thought of a way of measuring the phenomenon Im describing! But... "Science IS progressing" youll probably object, if so: Ill object that the number of scientists (i believe) has inclined during the period and that the speed has been high up to some undefined point in the twentieth century (1900-2000), it might take a while before this Babel Tower Effect will be painfully obvious. (Sorry Im digressing.)

    Ill end with the suggestion that we should NOT immediately enter into the difficult questions, however eager we are to attack them...perhaps we should do the opposite for a while: How about a cup of tea and a friendly chat about the weather? (Kidding just a little)

    Actually I would be VERY interested in reading a short but accurate mini treatise in ordinary layman language summarising your research! Are you able to produce?

    In order to give you a better picture of myself:
    https://dl.dropbox.com/u/103782929/IMG_1084.MOV

    PS:Could you tell me more of the differences between emotions and instinct...I tend to identify them!
    Oh yeah, sorry. I tend to forget that not everyone is in the same field that I am.
    That's an interesting point, which I'll think about/change the way I post based on it.
    Instinct is a different part of the brain than intelligence (or the thoughts you hear.) Unlike intelligence, it does a specific thing based on what you sense. For example, if something jumps out at you, that's what makes you flinch.
    The instinct part of the brain can also affect the intelligence part of the brain. For example, it makes you want to eat a cookie if you see it.
    Emotions are a bit different. They are produced by the same instinct part of the brain, but they don't just make you flinch or want to eat a cookie. Instead, they affect the entire brain, giving it a mood. For example, if you're sad, you will think in a completely different way. This is different from a specific movement or specific craving. It changes your way of thinking.
    "It is the ability to make predictions about the future that is the crux of intelligence."
    -Jeff Hawkins.
    For example, you can predict that 3+5=8. You can predict what sequence of muscle commands you should generate during a conversation, or whether an object is a desk or a chair. The brain is very complicated, but that is essentially how intelligence works. Instinct, emotions, and behavior are somewhat seperate.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  42. #41  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    715
    Quote Originally Posted by NNet View Post
    Instinct is a different part of the brain than intelligence (or the thoughts you hear.) Unlike intelligence, it does a specific thing based on what you sense. For example, if something jumps out at you, that's what makes you flinch.
    The instinct part of the brain can also affect the intelligence part of the brain. For example, it makes you want to eat a cookie if you see it.
    Emotions are a bit different. They are produced by the same instinct part of the brain, but they don't just make you flinch or want to eat a cookie. Instead, they affect the entire brain, giving it a mood. For example, if you're sad, you will think in a completely different way. This is different from a specific movement or specific craving. It changes your way of thinking.
    Hi! (A warning note:
    Try checking this first from anywhere!
    Its not a good example of linear flow.)

    First to take away all thats(here i fill in a forgotten "not") necessary.What I look at above my own text is understandable. I distinguish between Thoughts that are rational...def1: thought made up by words. Theres then left Thoughts not made up so. At the moment I have no idea of any word in english that Ive used say "ostentative" thoughts. Feelings and emotions are o-thoughts. I ve not noticed by introspection (an o-act but perhaps not necessarily so) (Mind you these thoughts are very new to me and nothing I say here is a finished and polished product) any clear border differentiating emotions and feelings. Also perhaps trying to be funny introspection never shows me my brain...I know wher my brain is but curiously nothing tells me wher I dwell. Thiz iz not a typical text of mine its not edited at all except a few backsteps. Mistakes are either accidental errorz , consciously decided errors put there for zhow...or mistakes made by something else.
    I notice that the end of a thought cant be seen from the beginning of an r-thought. Such thoughts must be a result ov iteration of some kind... i reach out with a wish for mental action and a set of dimly experienced beginnings is laid out...reminding me of the magicians: Pick a card! I step on the carde and reach out for the next but realizes i dont want it so illtake another...This is (i hope) a picture not too much defiating from whats going on. I stop this here. Or do i?(Aha! I wanna look! Its my rationality forcing me to experience the result.)
    This introspective behaviour has not gotten me anywhere...says MrR ...but i feel MrO is in disagreement. MrX is nothing but a convenient fiction MrR says and MrO looks disgusted shakes his head etc etc. Normally I dont look at me this way...it makes me (probably...how can I tell) slow. (((and shallow))) This method indeed isnt worth much (yet) what are my alternatives...THERE! was a question! MrO is VERY quick in pointing it out thereby claiming its HIS idea! I believe im not alone in my brain. I know mental diseases make my fairies into monsters. Sometimes succeeding in forcing the introspector to do their bidding perhaps with disaster following.

    May I remind you that you dont HAVE to read this xxx I have (?) to produce.

    This new spacing generally means im in the process of forming a decision... (waiting)

    yeah! I think im done I see no point to go on in the same manner.

    The gentlemen R iz trying to form united thinking forcing introspection out!

    Im now interested in cheating them a little and doing whast they want at the same time!

    YES! its MrR who wants me to report some of his glorious achievements. MrO is no longer really noticable.

    He claims he is older more powerful than R he is the tactician and R the strategist (!?)

    Where do I fit in here...I decide...im the free will! Or closest to it among us three (four if our combined efforts is a person.) Perhaps if a skilled introspectist is put under brainscan while a working b idling c getting disturbed d elsethings better observations could be made.

    (You responded to my question THANK YOU AGAIN if i remembered to do so earlier. Still ths thougt wouldent be here if i were not slightly interested to watch what I usually do)

    Are you aquainted with logic...I think what I call "modern Logic" is a tool of ppl using computers on non layman levels. So I answer YES in your place fine lets dive intio logic later no we ask: How do one know something to be true? Now I have a strategy...a plan for action...im slightly bored: Shall we #execute# it?

    Of course u noticed "#" Its a prescription for the action of replacing the marked piece of text with what the thing refers to ...#means# If I got it right...I rarely use it. Its only a mont(or so) old. I invented it when doing my version of the correspondence theory of truth. (#following a rational idea# = performing an act) ((Most times when things gets long I edit & compress them to contain only necessary components which I (for once!!!) refuse to do!

    Where were we? OW now you were funny MrO!!! (yeah! fatheads while you work ah prepare in the sense of the magician... the form i preparing is hinted in ways you wont notice until afterwords----MrR: OR its pure accident! (Writing tha lazt a storm of wishes to alter the flood of txt...occurs: #taking a brake#
    An hour later I dont feel a need of compleating th sVtxt I romised mself not to edit in any way so I send it with the feeling that Im crazy and

    I didnt forbid mself copying and edit the ccopy duid I?
    When I think I try first to take away all thats not necessary. I distinguish between Thoughts that are rational...def1: thought made up by words. And the rest thoughts. Feelings and emotions are o-thoughts.(Mind you these thoughts are very new to me and nothing I say here is a finished and polished product) Thiz iz not a typical text of mine its not edited at all.
    I notice that the end of a thought cant be seen from the beginning of an r-thought. Such thoughts must be a result ov iteration of some kind... i reach out with a wish for mental action and a set of dimly experienced beginnings is laid out...reminding me of the magicians: Pick a card! I step on the card and reach out for the next but realizes i dont want it so ill take another...Normally I dont look at me this way...it makes me (probably...how can I tell) slow. (((and shallow))) This method indeed isnt worth much (yet) what are my alternatives...THERE! was a question! I believe im not alone in my brain. I know mental diseases make my fairies into monsters. Sometimes succeeding in forcing the introspector to do their bidding perhaps with disaster following.

    This new spacing generally means im in the process of forming a decision... (waiting)

    yeah! I think im done I see no point to go on in the same manner.

    Where do I fit in here...I decide...im the free will! Or closest to it. Perhaps if a skilled introspectist
    is put under brainscan while a, working b, idling c, getting disturbed d, elsethings: better observations could be made.

    (Are you aquainted with logic...I think what I call "modern Logic" is a tool of ppl using computers on non layman levels.we ask: How do one know something to be true? Now I have a strategy...a plan for action...im slightly bored: Shall we #execute# it?

    Of course u noticed "#" Its a prescription for the action of replacing the marked piece of text with what the thing refers to.I rarely use it. I invented it when doing my version of the correspondence theory of truth. (#following a rational idea# = performing an act) ((Most times when things gets long I edit & compress them to contain only necessary components which I (for once!!!) refuse to do! Where were we? (oupps I edited some forbidden textory!)
    I didnt forbid copying? And edititing the copy did I?
    I think with and/or without words: Two basic modes of thinking.
    Theres also two basic modes of experience:
    Experience proper using unfree will: Ouch! That hurts!
    And experiencing your own thought: made using free will. "And experiencing...

    Feelings and emotions are experienced

    I notice that the end of a thought cant be seen from the beginning of an r-thought.
    Such thoughts must be a result of iteration of some kind...

    I believe im not alone in my brain. I know mental diseases make my fairies into monsters.
    Sometimes succeeding in forcing the introspector to do their bidding perhaps with disaster following.

    This new spacing generally means im in the process of forming a decision... (waiting)

    yeah! I think im done I see no point to go on in the same manner.

    Where do I fit in here...I decide...im the free will!
    Or closest to it. Perhaps I could be located
    Were I put under brainscan while:
    a, working
    b, idling
    c, getting disturbed
    d, elsethings

    Now I have a strategy...a plan for action: Shall we #execute# it?

    Of course u noticed "#"?
    Its a prescription for the action of replacing the marked
    with what the thing refers to.
    I rarely use it. I invented it when doing my version
    of the correspondence theory of truth.
    EDIT: Perhaps the following was the original impulse:
    Let this (FREE!?) text exemplify(!?) a free thought!
    IRL I would go on editing until Im fairly sure nothing is not thought of...
    Implied, prepared or whatnot.
    But this is how the infamous "Arrogant sV" is created!
    Or rather hiS most Vicious attacks...
    But it aint me babe
    Last edited by sigurdV; December 15th, 2012 at 03:07 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  43. #42  
    HTM fan
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    227
    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdV View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by NNet View Post
    Instinct is a different part of the brain than intelligence (or the thoughts you hear.) Unlike intelligence, it does a specific thing based on what you sense. For example, if something jumps out at you, that's what makes you flinch.
    The instinct part of the brain can also affect the intelligence part of the brain. For example, it makes you want to eat a cookie if you see it.
    Emotions are a bit different. They are produced by the same instinct part of the brain, but they don't just make you flinch or want to eat a cookie. Instead, they affect the entire brain, giving it a mood. For example, if you're sad, you will think in a completely different way. This is different from a specific movement or specific craving. It changes your way of thinking.
    Hi! (A warning note:
    Try checking this first from anywhere!
    Its not a good example of linear flow.)

    First to take away all thats(here i fill in a forgotten "not") necessary.What I look at above my own text is understandable. I distinguish between Thoughts that are rational...def1: thought made up by words. Theres then left Thoughts not made up so. At the moment I have no idea of any word in english that Ive used say "ostentative" thoughts. Feelings and emotions are o-thoughts. I ve not noticed by introspection (an o-act but perhaps not necessarily so) (Mind you these thoughts are very new to me and nothing I say here is a finished and polished product) any clear border differentiating emotions and feelings. Also perhaps trying to be funny introspection never shows me my brain...I know wher my brain is but curiously nothing tells me wher I dwell. Thiz iz not a typical text of mine its not edited at all except a few backsteps. Mistakes are either accidental errorz , consciously decided errors put there for zhow...or mistakes made by something else.
    I notice that the end of a thought cant be seen from the beginning of an r-thought. Such thoughts must be a result ov iteration of some kind... i reach out with a wish for mental action and a set of dimly experienced beginnings is laid out...reminding me of the magicians: Pick a card! I step on the carde and reach out for the next but realizes i dont want it so illtake another...This is (i hope) a picture not too much defiating from whats going on. I stop this here. Or do i?(Aha! I wanna look! Its my rationality forcing me to experience the result.)
    This introspective behaviour has not gotten me anywhere...says MrR ...but i feel MrO is in disagreement. MrX is nothing but a convenient fiction MrR says and MrO looks disgusted shakes his head etc etc. Normally I dont look at me this way...it makes me (probably...how can I tell) slow. (((and shallow))) This method indeed isnt worth much (yet) what are my alternatives...THERE! was a question! MrO is VERY quick in pointing it out thereby claiming its HIS idea! I believe im not alone in my brain. I know mental diseases make my fairies into monsters. Sometimes succeeding in forcing the introspector to do their bidding perhaps with disaster following.

    May I remind you that you dont HAVE to read this xxx I have (?) to produce.

    This new spacing generally means im in the process of forming a decision... (waiting)

    yeah! I think im done I see no point to go on in the same manner.

    The gentlemen R iz trying to form united thinking forcing introspection out!

    Im now interested in cheating them a little and doing whast they want at the same time!

    YES! its MrR who wants me to report some of his glorious achievements. MrO is no longer really noticable.

    He claims he is older more powerful than R he is the tactician and R the strategist (!?)

    Where do I fit in here...I decide...im the free will! Or closest to it among us three (four if our combined efforts is a person.) Perhaps if a skilled introspectist is put under brainscan while a working b idling c getting disturbed d elsethings better observations could be made.

    (You responded to my question THANK YOU AGAIN if i remembered to do so earlier. Still ths thougt wouldent be here if i were not slightly interested to watch what I usually do)

    Are you aquainted with logic...I think what I call "modern Logic" is a tool of ppl using computers on non layman levels. So I answer YES in your place fine lets dive intio logic later no we ask: How do one know something to be true? Now I have a strategy...a plan for action...im slightly bored: Shall we #execute# it?

    Of course u noticed "#" Its a prescription for the action of replacing the marked piece of text with what the thing refers to ...#means# If I got it right...I rarely use it. Its only a mont(or so) old. I invented it when doing my version of the correspondence theory of truth. (#following a rational idea# = performing an act) ((Most times when things gets long I edit & compress them to contain only necessary components which I (for once!!!) refuse to do!

    Where were we? OW now you were funny MrO!!! (yeah! fatheads while you work ah prepare in the sense of the magician... the form i preparing is hinted in ways you wont notice until afterwords----MrR: OR its pure accident! (Writing tha lazt a storm of wishes to alter the flood of txt...occurs: #taking a brake#
    An hour later I dont feel a need of compleating th sVtxt I romised mself not to edit in any way so I send it with the feeling that Im crazy and

    I didnt forbid mself copying and edit the ccopy duid I?
    When I think I try first to take away all thats not necessary. I distinguish between Thoughts that are rational...def1: thought made up by words. And the rest thoughts. Feelings and emotions are o-thoughts.(Mind you these thoughts are very new to me and nothing I say here is a finished and polished product) Thiz iz not a typical text of mine its not edited at all.
    I notice that the end of a thought cant be seen from the beginning of an r-thought. Such thoughts must be a result ov iteration of some kind... i reach out with a wish for mental action and a set of dimly experienced beginnings is laid out...reminding me of the magicians: Pick a card! I step on the card and reach out for the next but realizes i dont want it so ill take another...Normally I dont look at me this way...it makes me (probably...how can I tell) slow. (((and shallow))) This method indeed isnt worth much (yet) what are my alternatives...THERE! was a question! I believe im not alone in my brain. I know mental diseases make my fairies into monsters. Sometimes succeeding in forcing the introspector to do their bidding perhaps with disaster following.

    This new spacing generally means im in the process of forming a decision... (waiting)

    yeah! I think im done I see no point to go on in the same manner.

    Where do I fit in here...I decide...im the free will! Or closest to it. Perhaps if a skilled introspectist
    is put under brainscan while a, working b, idling c, getting disturbed d, elsethings: better observations could be made.

    (Are you aquainted with logic...I think what I call "modern Logic" is a tool of ppl using computers on non layman levels.we ask: How do one know something to be true? Now I have a strategy...a plan for action...im slightly bored: Shall we #execute# it?

    Of course u noticed "#" Its a prescription for the action of replacing the marked piece of text with what the thing refers to.I rarely use it. I invented it when doing my version of the correspondence theory of truth. (#following a rational idea# = performing an act) ((Most times when things gets long I edit & compress them to contain only necessary components which I (for once!!!) refuse to do! Where were we? (oupps I edited some forbidden textory!)
    I didnt forbid copying? And edititing the copy did I?
    I think with and/or without words: Two basic modes of thinking.
    Theres also two basic modes of experience:
    Experience proper using unfree will: Ouch! That hurts!
    And experiencing your own thought: made using free will. "And experiencing...

    Feelings and emotions are experienced

    I notice that the end of a thought cant be seen from the beginning of an r-thought.
    Such thoughts must be a result of iteration of some kind...

    I believe im not alone in my brain. I know mental diseases make my fairies into monsters.
    Sometimes succeeding in forcing the introspector to do their bidding perhaps with disaster following.

    This new spacing generally means im in the process of forming a decision... (waiting)

    yeah! I think im done I see no point to go on in the same manner.

    Where do I fit in here...I decide...im the free will!
    Or closest to it. Perhaps I could be located
    Were I put under brainscan while:
    a, working
    b, idling
    c, getting disturbed
    d, elsethings

    Now I have a strategy...a plan for action: Shall we #execute# it?

    Of course u noticed "#"?
    Its a prescription for the action of replacing the marked
    with what the thing refers to.
    I rarely use it. I invented it when doing my version
    of the correspondence theory of truth.
    EDIT: Perhaps the following was the original impulse:
    Let this (FREE!?) text exemplify(!?) a free thought!
    IRL I would go on editing until Im fairly sure nothing is not thought of...
    Implied, prepared or whatnot.
    But this is how the infamous "Arrogant sV" is created!
    Or rather hiS most Vicious attacks...
    But it aint me babe
    I don't really get it. Is it an example of of unlinear writing? Is it saying that I have no evidence (I can give some for some of it)? Is it saying you think that's what unconscious thought is?
    sigurdV likes this.
    "It is the ability to make predictions about the future that is the crux of intelligence."
    -Jeff Hawkins.
    For example, you can predict that 3+5=8. You can predict what sequence of muscle commands you should generate during a conversation, or whether an object is a desk or a chair. The brain is very complicated, but that is essentially how intelligence works. Instinct, emotions, and behavior are somewhat seperate.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  44. #43  
    Ascended Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Norfolk
    Posts
    3,414
    Quote Originally Posted by qwertyman View Post
    do we realy have free will?
    In a word no, why because we are required to do things to survive, can I decide not to eat for the next month? No because I'll starve to death, can I decide not to breath? No because I will suffocate. So is really free will if your only options are do something or die? Not much exercise of free will going on there.
    Everything has its beauty, but not everyone sees it. - confucius
    Reply With Quote  
     

  45. #44  
    HTM fan
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    227
    Quote Originally Posted by Chrisgorlitz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by qwertyman View Post
    do we realy have free will?
    In a word no, why because we are required to do things to survive, can I decide not to eat for the next month? No because I'll starve to death, can I decide not to breath? No because I will suffocate. So is really free will if your only options are do something or die? Not much exercise of free will going on there.
    We do have the option to do any of those things, if we're driven to the emotional level of anorexia or suicide. We still don't have free will though, in a sense. Everything we do is in an attempt to achieve our most basic goals (happiness, ethics, etc.) We might have free will with decisions rather than goals, but I don't think so because whatever one does is for those basic goals. We are conscious and not robots, yet we don't have free will. I might have missed some paradox there, I'm not sure.
    "It is the ability to make predictions about the future that is the crux of intelligence."
    -Jeff Hawkins.
    For example, you can predict that 3+5=8. You can predict what sequence of muscle commands you should generate during a conversation, or whether an object is a desk or a chair. The brain is very complicated, but that is essentially how intelligence works. Instinct, emotions, and behavior are somewhat seperate.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  46. #45  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    715
    Quote Originally Posted by NNet View Post
    [I don't really get it. Is it an example of of unlinear writing? Is it saying that I have no evidence (I can give some for some of it)? Is it saying you think that's what unconscious thought is?
    WHAT ...is understanding? It has to do with mind somehow. Right? And what is free will...? Determination? Predestination? What is the #it# under discussion? Do I know? ((((no))))) Am I guessing? (yes)
    I always guess! I never claim (anything) Im forever accepting that i perhaps was (or will be) wrong in the finished sentence...

    The production above is unedited... ((NO! not NOW at this level of edition : The (and the only "the") time traveller is "or will be")) Its the result of an impression gotten by a willed act: reading your message.

    Things i thought of but didnt put in the intro part of this whole thing: Intention...intentional level...

    You didnt understand! (you said) I dont understand either: I INTERPRETE what I already have done!

    That IS what we do. We carry in our memory an edited picture of our past and interprete it(let it be blue): thereby in fact adding the latest layer in the past and then we interprete it again...and again ...and: Here we are!

    (Red intended to be the analogue of present and blue its past)

    The picture of the past is linear in the sense that it consists of ordered snapshots of the previous pasts but, since edition is going on, its not linear if you read the pack of cards from beginning to end...there are missing parts and future parts put into previous pasts but that aleays was done at a later stage than the #time travelling part# was written for the first time.

    The present semblance of order is but an edition of its chaotic past. Sentences (and editions) really should be numbered! Suppose everything before these two "last"statements were gone... would you then be able to understand what then would be the first sentence but in fact never was? Perhaps you could interprete it correctly but that aint knowing that you would!

    We must pass fragments of our realities between each other a little while before we, independently of each other, can see stable convincing patterns that "proves" the other to be a conscious mind instead of you know what!

    Conversations so far looked at from my view are in general total failures. I never get any proof that the reciever understands my message... yes... I get reactions... but rarely adequate penetrative responses...But who cares? The weather is nice. I like sitting here by the river and: Lets play a game of chess? Youre white: My first move is:King Knight to King Bishop three.

    (A nice fantasy here is meeting the master who will win the game
    in spite of choosing King pawn to king four as his first move...)

    Post Scriptum: Either I should apologizzze or point out that we havent finished our first attempt of successful communication yet...I did not intend to predict your answer to be inadequate!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  47. #46  
    Ascended Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Norfolk
    Posts
    3,414
    Quote Originally Posted by NNet View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Chrisgorlitz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by qwertyman View Post
    do we realy have free will?
    In a word no, why because we are required to do things to survive, can I decide not to eat for the next month? No because I'll starve to death, can I decide not to breath? No because I will suffocate. So is really free will if your only options are do something or die? Not much exercise of free will going on there.
    We do have the option to do any of those things, if we're driven to the emotional level of anorexia or suicide. We still don't have free will though, in a sense. Everything we do is in an attempt to achieve our most basic goals (happiness, ethics, etc.) We might have free will with decisions rather than goals, but I don't think so because whatever one does is for those basic goals. We are conscious and not robots, yet we don't have free will. I might have missed some paradox there, I'm not sure.
    Hey that's an interesting thought I wonder if we designed a computer program to achieve various objectives but gave the program the ability to use various differents options for achieving the desired objectives whether we could then say that the computer program had free will as it would be that much different from the way we as humans function.
    Everything has its beauty, but not everyone sees it. - confucius
    Reply With Quote  
     

  48. #47  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    715
    Now after trying to illustrate, ill state my position in a few words:
    We dont know what mind IS, if YOU say mind is not free since its determined by x
    then I say : Mind IS x together with a few other not equally necessary things.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  49. #48  
    HTM fan
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    227
    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdV View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by NNet View Post
    [I don't really get it. Is it an example of of unlinear writing? Is it saying that I have no evidence (I can give some for some of it)? Is it saying you think that's what unconscious thought is?
    WHAT ...is understanding? It has to do with mind somehow. Right? And what is free will...? Determination? Predestination? What is the #it# under discussion? Do I know? ((((no))))) Am I guessing? (yes)
    I always guess! I never claim (anything) Im forever accepting that i perhaps was (or will be) wrong in the finished sentence...

    The production above is unedited... ((NO! not NOW at this level of edition : The (and the only "the") time traveller is "or will be")) Its the result of an impression gotten by a willed act: reading your message.

    Things i thought of but didnt put in the intro part of this whole thing: Intention...intentional level...

    You didnt understand! (you said) I dont understand either: I INTERPRETE what I already have done!

    That IS what we do. We carry in our memory an edited picture of our past and interprete it(let it be blue): thereby in fact adding the latest layer in the past and then we interprete it again...and again ...and: Here we are!

    (Red intended to be the analogue of present and blue its past)

    The picture of the past is linear in the sense that it consists of ordered snapshots of the previous pasts but, since edition is going on, its not linear if you read the pack of cards from beginning to end...there are missing parts and future parts put into previous pasts but that aleays was done at a later stage than the #time travelling part# was written for the first time.

    The present semblance of order is but an edition of its chaotic past. Sentences (and editions) really should be numbered! Suppose everything before these two "last"statements were gone... would you then be able to understand what then would be the first sentence but in fact never was? Perhaps you could interprete it correctly but that aint knowing that you would!

    We must pass fragments of our realities between each other a little while before we, independently of each other, can see stable convincing patterns that "proves" the other to be a conscious mind instead of you know what!

    Conversations so far looked at from my view are in general total failures. I never get any proof that the reciever understands my message... yes... I get reactions... but rarely adequate penetrative responses...But who cares? The weather is nice. I like sitting here by the river and: Lets play a game of chess? Youre white: My first move is:King Knight to King Bishop three.

    (A nice fantasy here is meeting the master who will win the game
    in spite of choosing King pawn to king four as his first move...)

    Post Scriptum: Either I should apologizzze or point out that we havent finished our first attempt of successful communication yet...I did not intend to predict your answer to be inadequate!
    I think I get what you're saying. (For me) barely conscious thoughts are ADHD, and the more conscious they are, the more focused they are. Maybe all thoughts are conscious in some way, but are on a spectrum.
    "It is the ability to make predictions about the future that is the crux of intelligence."
    -Jeff Hawkins.
    For example, you can predict that 3+5=8. You can predict what sequence of muscle commands you should generate during a conversation, or whether an object is a desk or a chair. The brain is very complicated, but that is essentially how intelligence works. Instinct, emotions, and behavior are somewhat seperate.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  50. #49  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    715
    Quote Originally Posted by NNet View Post
    I think I get what you're saying. (For me) barely conscious thoughts are ADHD, and the more conscious they are, the more focused they are. Maybe all thoughts are conscious in some way, but are on a spectrum.
    A rare reaction. Ill take a break. Go out smoke a cig... return... look again...and see if it still looks the same.
    Yes we have communicated successfully!
    Congratulations! You now belong to a very limited set of ppl:
    Defined by them openly declaring they have understood something ive said!
    What next? How about you visiting pseudoscience?

    "How is a selfsupported space station constructed?"
    Hows your laymannish proceedin?
    I tried visiting your other thread but fell asleep on first sight...sorry!
    BTW did you get the point with "#"?
    You didnt fall asleep when you saw it?
    Please now try to stay awake

    The theory of truth.

    We compare the thought expressed by its sentence with reality.

    Ex1:
    1: Sentence 1 contains only words. (assumption)
    2: Sentence 1 = "Sentence 1 contains only words." (identifier)
    3: ""Sentence 1 contains only words." contains only words. (conclusion to be inspected)

    We inspect sentence 3 and can plainly see that the object spoken of contains the number one so sentence one is not true because IT MEANS THE SAME AS SENTENCE three. QED

    Such a simple and obvious theory... but theres a problem... it seems as if it can be proven false!
    But lets see how another time ok? Lets just abstract a little and go on.

    Sentences can be reduced to this form: xY. Where "x" is the object and "Y" the quality.
    And to every x there is a formula "x = xZ" That identifies x.

    We started with a slightly offensive example, now we do it for a more down to earth sentence:

    1 The sun is shining. (assumption)
    2 ???? WTF! How do we proceed here? Wheres the identifier?
    Solution:
    2 The sun = #The sun# (identifier)
    3 #The sun# is shining. (conclusion)

    Now the theory (in it simplest form) WORKS for all sentences!
    My sign "#" is not at all necessary in forming the theory, it only simplifies things.
    My theory of truth essentially is nothing but the old well known correspondence theory...

    But I express it in a more condensed way

    HEY! wake up!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  51. #50  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,907
    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdV View Post
    Congratulations! You now belong to a very limited set of ppl:
    Defined by them openly declaring they have understood something ive said!
    Heheeeheeeheheee. The ultimate test of a person's integrity... subject them to the logic of SigurdV. If they claim to understand, they are either deluded or genius, if they admit confusion they are honest and Human. Whether a person is deluded or genius is something only Sigurd is able to decipher.

    Sigurd is saying that he so far has not had any evidence that he is speaking to conscious minds... he has not seen enough snapshots of the realities of others in order for him to recognise patterns in that persons perception of reality which he can relate to as conscious... right SigurdV?
    I'm kidding, I don't really understand!

    Reply With Quote  
     

  52. #51  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,907
    Quote Originally Posted by sculptor View Post
    When I sculpt "I worry the damned thing to death"---looking and thinking and second guessing my decisions and struggling every second, minute, hour and inch of the way........then somewhere in the process, I quit thinking with the conscious mind and marvelous amounts of work get done in very short timespans--------often, when modeling clay, I will run out of warmed and softened clay, and have to pause while more clay is prepared, or not notice time, and have to be reminded by the model.--------those times without the internal dialogue, are really the ultimate in creativity.
    Yes indeed sculptor, I know this phenomena well, though I understand it little.

    Whenever I do really good work it often feels like I have been in a form of trance... I look at the clock and hours have past, it seems like the whole time was merely a fleeting moment.

    It seems to be the result of such concentration on my task that I completely forget about distractions like time, and 'thinking'.

    When I am able to get into this mental 'zone' and be absorbed by my task... I tend to think of it as high 'creative energy'. When creative energy and enthusiam is high, then consciouness of anything other than my task is inhibited... I am not even always aware of being aware, conscious of being conscious, whilst absorbed in my task.

    I would be inclined to think that this 'trance' or 'zone' is not sub or un-consciousness... rather it is 'focussed' consciousness... concentration. Therefore I would liken it more to 'super' consciousness, directed consciousness, focussed consciousness. Who knows though... perhaps this phenomena is a special part of the mind, or even the subconscious mind acting out.



    One interesting thought imo is that concentration, which is a very important aspect of intelligence, is the opposite of being conscious and aware of everything. Those who are engrossed in their work are not thinking about this that and the other. Those who are thinking about this that and the other, are not properly concentrating on their work.

    Is this why knowledge of good and bad is warned against? as if our head is full of every fact then how often can we let it all go and exercise concentration on our task at hand? It seems to me that concentration is a real form of intelligence/mind power, trivial knowledge is likely to be a hinderance when it comes to excercising concentration.

    I have no idea where i'm going with this.

    But it sure is good to forget all the nonsense and just engross oneself in a past time which is able to completely absorb our consciouness'.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  53. #52  
    HTM fan
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    227
    Quote Originally Posted by question for you View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdV View Post
    Congratulations! You now belong to a very limited set of ppl:
    Defined by them openly declaring they have understood something ive said!
    Heheeeheeeheheee. The ultimate test of a person's integrity... subject them to the logic of SigurdV. If they claim to understand, they are either deluded or genius, if they admit confusion they are honest and Human. Whether a person is deluded or genius is something only Sigurd is able to decipher.

    Sigurd is saying that he so far has not had any evidence that he is speaking to conscious minds... he has not seen enough snapshots of the realities of others in order for him to recognise patterns in that persons perception of reality which he can relate to as conscious... right SigurdV?
    I'm kidding, I don't really understand!

    I was asking if I understood, and he seemed to think I did, so I guess I fit the later category. Except not, I have no idea what he meant now that I think about his response...
    I was saying that I thought I understood what he was saying, then I wrote what I thought he meant.
    Although I am kind of deluded with the sciences.
    "It is the ability to make predictions about the future that is the crux of intelligence."
    -Jeff Hawkins.
    For example, you can predict that 3+5=8. You can predict what sequence of muscle commands you should generate during a conversation, or whether an object is a desk or a chair. The brain is very complicated, but that is essentially how intelligence works. Instinct, emotions, and behavior are somewhat seperate.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  54. #53  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    715
    Quote Originally Posted by question for you View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdV View Post
    Congratulations! You now belong to a very limited set of ppl:
    Defined by them openly declaring they have understood something ive said!
    Heheeeheeeheheee. The ultimate test of a person's integrity... subject them to the logic of SigurdV. If they claim to understand, they are either deluded or genius, if they admit confusion they are honest and Human. Whether a person is deluded or genius is something only SigurdV is able to decipher.

    Sigurd is saying that he so far has not had any evidence that he is speaking to conscious minds... he has not seen enough snapshots of the realities of others in order for him to recognise patterns in that persons perception of reality which he can relate to as conscious... right SigurdV?
    I'm kidding, I don't really understand!

    Im having a nightmare! #pinching my arm# #correcting a minor zpelling mistake done by opponent#
    Funniest nightmare Ive ever had.
    Thereby proving itself not to be a nighmare! No subconcious is that witty!
    What do I do now? Admit defeat? #checking for paradoxical statements# Report: Yes the end is paradoxical but not in the Epimenidian sense...its a Socratic paradox: Ostentating its truth on next semaniac level. Pzzzt sV: You cant prove him wrong! In order to make his penetrating statement he must know what you meant in several instances...What will you do, forget about it? Make up your ...eh...mind, the opponent is waiting for a reply...
    You could of course always try a beloved technique in here: postponement and total silence combined with the ignore button... NOPE! It aint me babe.

    HI! I lost this battle! You aint telling the truth but I cant prove that!

    Edit:I have on close inspection found you both funny
    and able to make a convincing argument
    I think we met before havent we?
    Were friends arent we?
    Last edited by sigurdV; December 17th, 2012 at 05:31 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  55. #54  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    613
    TANSTAAFW

    If it is free, it has no value. If it is a will, it could be "peace on earth". Utterly pointless.

    If it is "degree of liberty in action", it entirely depends on the possibilities learned, and the various cost associated.

    Here, I'll show you, I am willing myself out of this thread, I can afford it, I have friends.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  56. #55  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,907
    Quote Originally Posted by NNet View Post
    I was saying that I thought I understood what he was saying, then I wrote what I thought he meant.
    Although I am kind of deluded with the sciences.
    Well aren't we all deluded?

    Sigurd is a very hard man to understand... I think it's because he has a great intelligence, though I don't know as I can't understand most of it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  57. #56  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,907
    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdV View Post
    You could of course always try a beloved technique in here: postponement and total silence combined with the ignore button... NOPE! It aint me babe.
    I know full well that such actions are well bellow you SigurdV.

    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdV View Post
    HI! I lost this battle! You aint telling the truth but I cant prove that!
    I have no intention of entering into battle with you sir. Therefor you cannot have lost.

    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdV View Post
    Edit:I have on close inspection found you both funny
    and able to make a convincing argument
    I think we met before havent we?
    Were friends arent we?
    Why thank you very much Sigurd. I have met and had extensive chats with a most interesting chap called SigurdW... I am now 99% certain that this chap was indeed you.

    I would very much like to think we are indeed friends. I certainly have much affection and respect for you and your ways.

    If at first you sense contention in my words to you, please read again, as the chances are that I have no intention of entering into battle with you SigurdV. I very much enjoyed my previous conversations with SigurdW, no person has ever left me so mentality drained. Usually I can work out if a persons logic is sound or faulty, often your logic is beyond my comprehension. That is quite rare and very respectable as far as i'm concerned.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  58. #57  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    715
    Quote Originally Posted by NNet View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by question for you View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdV View Post
    Congratulations! You now belong to a very limited set of ppl:
    Defined by them openly declaring they have understood something ive said!
    Heheeeheeeheheee. The ultimate test of a person's integrity... subject them to the logic of SigurdV. If they claim to understand, they are either deluded or genius, if they admit confusion they are honest and Human. Sigurd is saying that he so far has not had any evidence that he is speaking to conscious minds... he has not seen enough snapshots of the realities of others in order for him to recognise patterns in that persons perception of reality which he can relate to as conscious... right SigurdV?
    I'm kidding, I don't really understand!

    I was asking if I understood, and he seemed to think I did, so I guess I fit the later category. Except not, I have no idea what he meant now that I think about his response...
    I was saying that I thought I understood what he was saying, then I wrote what I thought he meant.
    Although I am kind of deluded with the sciences.
    Youre trying to retrace your steps. That is rational. I need at least two (and here I use the swedish word "väsen" best translation being "sentiences" its a minimum concept for something existing in the mind...or rather the brain) sentiences to explain and understand my functioning. One having the ability to understand something immediately as a whole without analyzing it further...and another seeing (my rationality) the same object as a sum of parts.
    This is how my mind looks like by introspection...I expect anybody to have a similar experience so I think its a good place to start if we want to verify the understanding of each other. Besides you are scientifically studying mind with the aim of constructing artificial minds wich makes you an interesting person in my eyes. I look forward to understand what & how youve done so far. I have no doubt: We communicated successfully. (I gave a definition of communication.) That only proves we CAN communicate. No more no less.
    Next round: My serve: What is it you would like to understand? (Any "it" will do)

    Edit: Im now editing out a part of QFY.s statement I consider false.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  59. #58  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    715
    Quote Originally Posted by question for you View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdV View Post
    You could of course always try a beloved technique in here: postponement and total silence combined with the ignore button... NOPE! It aint me babe.
    I know full well that such actions are well bellow you SigurdV.

    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdV View Post
    HI! I lost this battle! You aint telling the truth but I cant prove that!
    I have no intention of entering into battle with you sir. Therefor you cannot have lost.
    Nah! It was a fair battle of wills. You planned it and carried it out beautifully! I like loosing such fights if necessary. Of course I prefere to win but deny the opponent his prize? The knowledge that the object of his attack understands what has been done?? NEVER! I LOST...now lets forget about that. (Battles are successful communications in so far as the defeated understands that he lost. Whats wrong with a battle? Im not nitzchean but war is sometimes necessary...Why suppress the natural urge to battle? Why become a lazy cow(sorry maam) ripe for domestication? Our moral sense protects us from acquiring too much damage.)
    Quote Originally Posted by question for you View Post
    [

    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdV View Post
    Edit:I have on close inspection found you both funny
    and able to make a convincing argument
    I think we met before havent we?
    Were friends arent we?
    Why thank you very much Sigurd. I have met and had extensive chats with a most interesting chap called SigurdW... I am now 99% certain that this chap was indeed you.

    I would very much like to think we are indeed friends. I certainly have much affection and respect for you and your ways.

    If at first you sense contention in my words to you, please read again, as the chances are that I have no intention of entering into battle with you SigurdV.?
    Bah! Admit it: That win was a once in a lifetime lucky strike with MARS on YOUR side for a change
    (That reminds me i really must take into consideration whether i can keep respecting (youll never hear me pray, Im a carnivore) them greece gods now that Ive accidentally become the founder of the first and only scientific religion there is...HeY! Why dont YOU try to prove me wrong there? Them other lazy cows (sorry MrScientist) doesnt stop munching hay.)

    Quote Originally Posted by question for you View Post
    [
    I very much enjoyed my previous conversations with SigurdW, no person has ever left me so mentality drained. Usually I can work out if a persons logic is sound or faulty, often your logic is beyond my comprehension. That is quite rare and very respectable as far as i'm concerned.
    I remember you! But vaguely...my memory aint what it used to be...but accompanied with the memories theres an orchestra playing Russian harmony... Its most probably a sign of my affection. Thats why I decided we have been and indeed are...friends. So how come atheists get so angry with you? Do you deserve it?

    Yes I remember giving you the rational tour:
    Why does not sentence three follow?
    1 Sentence 1 is not true (assumption)
    2 Sentence 1 = "Sentence 1 is not true" (identifyer)
    3 "Sentence 1 is not true" is not true (conclusion)

    This is what proves the Theory of Truth to be wrong... I couldnt live with that so I spent 30 years
    on top of a flag pole meditating on the 2000 year old "unsolvable" problem.
    Ahem...im gotten a bit tired of telling the truth in the same way like a parrot so i took some liberty with it

    Well I have a theory (That damn statement echoes): when the rational experiences the ostentative in this case
    its like a mental vulcano eruption. Ive experienced it and is awaiting to hear if that was a phenomenon reserved for its discoverer...somewhat like the demon in the bottle or if anyone feels the same at first understanding.

    Modern Logic rests on the action to exclude ALL self reference...
    I couldnt live with that.
    If statements cant speak about themselves then how can I?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  60. #59  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    715
    Quote Originally Posted by question for you View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by sculptor View Post
    When I sculpt "I worry the damned thing to death"---looking and thinking and second guessing my decisions and struggling every second, minute, hour and inch of the way........then somewhere in the process, I quit thinking with the conscious mind and marvelous amounts of work get done in very short timespans--------often, when modeling clay, I will run out of warmed and softened clay, and have to pause while more clay is prepared, or not notice time, and have to be reminded by the model.--------those times without the internal dialogue, are really the ultimate in creativity.
    Yes indeed sculptor, I know this phenomena well, though I understand it little.

    Whenever I do really good work it often feels like I have been in a form of trance... I look at the clock and hours have past, it seems like the whole time was merely a fleeting moment.

    It seems to be the result of such concentration on my task that I completely forget about distractions like time, and 'thinking'.

    When I am able to get into this mental 'zone' and be absorbed by my task... I tend to think of it as high 'creative energy'. When creative energy and enthusiam is high, then consciouness of anything other than my task is inhibited... I am not even always aware of being aware, conscious of being conscious, whilst absorbed in my task.

    I would be inclined to think that this 'trance' or 'zone' is not sub or un-consciousness... rather it is 'focussed' consciousness... concentration. Therefore I would liken it more to 'super' consciousness, directed consciousness, focussed consciousness. Who knows though... perhaps this phenomena is a special part of the mind, or even the subconscious mind acting out.



    One interesting thought imo is that concentration, which is a very important aspect of intelligence, is the opposite of being conscious and aware of everything. Those who are engrossed in their work are not thinking about this that and the other. Those who are thinking about this that and the other, are not properly concentrating on their work.

    Is this why knowledge of good and bad is warned against? as if our head is full of every fact then how often can we let it all go and exercise concentration on our task at hand? It seems to me that concentration is a real form of intelligence/mind power, trivial knowledge is likely to be a hinderance when it comes to excercising concentration.

    I have no idea where i'm going with this.

    But it sure is good to forget all the nonsense and just engross oneself in a past time which is able to completely absorb our consciouness'.
    Its the same experience for all of us. MrR and MrO I call them. The rational and the ostensinal. This does not explain anything...its the names ive given them. We have here COMMON GROUND.R does as we pleases we nearly control him.
    But isnt it O who actually carries out our wish. we ourselves only look on and says yes or no to things. And its when the three actors join forces without interfering with each other we function at 95%.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  61. #60  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,907
    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdV View Post
    Nah! It was a fair battle of wills. You planned it and carried it out beautifully! I like loosing such fights if necessary. Of course I prefere to win but deny the opponent his prize? The knowledge that the object of his attack understands what has been done?? NEVER! I LOST...now lets forget about that. (Battles are successful communications in so far as the defeated understands that he lost. Whats wrong with a battle? Im not nitzchean but war is sometimes necessary...Why suppress the natural urge to battle? Why become a lazy cow(sorry maam) ripe for domestication? Our moral sense protects us from acquiring too much damage.)
    Bah! Admit it: That win was a once in a lifetime lucky strike with MARS on YOUR side for a change
    (That reminds me i really must take into consideration whether i can keep respecting (youll never hear me pray, Im a carnivore) them greece gods now that Ive accidentally become the founder of the first and only scientific religion there is...HeY! Why dont YOU try to prove me wrong there? Them other lazy cows (sorry MrScientist) doesnt stop munching hay.)
    Well in this case I gracefully accept the victory and count my lucky stars for future reference.
    I did notice your new religion... minimalism isn't it? I will see what I can come up with next time i stumble upon that thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdV View Post
    I remember you! But vaguely...my memory aint what it used to be...but accompanied with the memories theres an orchestra playing Russian harmony... Its most probably a sign of my affection. Thats why I decided we have been and indeed are...friends. So how come atheists get so angry with you? Do you deserve it?
    Well I do beleive we got along well my friend...

    It isn't Atheist who got angry with me, and I have no objection to Atheism. I saw theism being bashed by an 'Atheist' who went on to claim that atheism is not a beleif.

    I took a logical objection to the situation... I considered the act of dismissing theism and theists as in someway inferior to Atheists, to be stemming from a beleif. So I considered that this 'theist bashing' is infact anti-theism or im-theism rather than Atheism.

    The imtheistic acts were comitted in the name of Atheism and so one or two Atheists naturally sided with who they initialy considered 'there own'.

    It's not that I have a problem with Atheism, not at all... I don't really have a problem with imtheism (though I don't think it necesary personally)... but when that imtheism is comitted by somebody who claims to be superior to theists as they are atheists (which means they are indifferent to such beleifs)... then I decide to take objection and say 'hang on a minute, your claiming theist beleif lacks logic, but what logic does your anti theistic beleif contain? and why do you disguise it as Atheism? it is not Atheism, it is not a rational indifference to that which is beyond your understanding, on the contrary, it is a beleif that all theists lack rationality in comparison with atheists... which is actually a belief as much as theism is a beleif, and therefor you have proven that you are not an Atheist and that you actually hold beleifs which you are unable to justify... just like a typical theist. As i'm sure you can imagine... it all descended into repetative 'mudslinging' and rhetoric.

    But thats all in the past, I have done my bit for theistic freedoms and am proud to have done so. It's unfortunate that I have offended Atheists but hopefully most of them understood what I was trying to say. I was just trying to make a distinction between Atheism and imtheism, if truth be told. I conclude that imtheism is one beleif, theism is another and atheism sits impartially in the middle. Others may disagree with this.

    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdV View Post
    Yes I remember giving you the rational tour:
    Why does not sentence three follow?
    1 Sentence 1 is not true (assumption)
    2 Sentence 1 = "Sentence 1 is not true" (identifyer)
    3 "Sentence 1 is not true" is not true (conclusion)

    This is what proves the Theory of Truth to be wrong... I couldnt live with that so I spent 30 years
    on top of a flag pole meditating on the 2000 year old "unsolvable" problem.
    Ahem...im gotten a bit tired of telling the truth in the same way like a parrot so i took some liberty with it
    Yes indeed that was our discussion Sig. I rejected the professed truth of 'thiestic irrationality', in the same way that I reject other so called truths... At the same time I don't accept theistic notions professed as truth. In truth Sig, I might be an atheist, I never said I wasn't... though at this point i'm certainly not an im-theist (anti theist) and if I was, I would not hide behind a cloak of Indifference (which is the definition of Atheism). I would be loud and proud of my belief in no god and declare myself an anti theist, not an indifferent atheist.

    It really is hard to explain sig but bassically, I tried to make a point that I cannot logically accept the arguments of somebody who claims that theism is a make beleive concept akin to pink unicorns, and then in the same breath claims that they are not anti theists, they are merely Atheists.

    A theist has a beleif in God (beleif)
    An Atheist is indiferent to beleif in God, it doesn't affect them. (non beleif)
    An Imtheist beleives that beleif in God is irrational etc. (beleif)

    I have no problem with any of the positions above... and have chosen non for myself. But I do have a logical objection to people claiming to belong to one lable when exhibiting the traits of another.

    At this stage I need to inform you that imtheism is a concept which I described and sculptor found the right affix for, it for whatever strange reason, does not have a place in the english dictionary. It means anti theism.

    I hope you will be able to understand my thinking Sigurd but I advise you not to get into the discussion, it caused me enough trouble.

    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdV View Post
    Well I have a theory (That damn statement echoes): when the rational experiences the ostentative in this case
    its like a mental vulcano eruption. Ive experienced it and is awaiting to hear if that was a phenomenon reserved for its discoverer...somewhat like the demon in the bottle or if anyone feels the same at first understanding.
    When the rational experiences the ostentatious it results in an irreversable reaction?

    In that the rational cannot tollerate the ostentatious?

    I certainly have the occasional volcanic like reaction to ostentatious displays of rhetoric... but only occasionaly.

    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdV View Post
    Modern Logic rests on the action to exclude ALL self reference...
    I couldnt live with that.
    If statements cant speak about themselves then how can I?
    This is all above my head sigurd... All self refference? I need an example of logic including or exhibiting self reference. otherwise I cannot comprehend it.


    Anyway... I am glad you remember me again.

    Reply With Quote  
     

  62. #61  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,907
    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdV View Post
    Its the same experience for all of us. MrR and MrO I call them. The rational and the ostensinal. This does not explain anything...its the names ive given them. We have here COMMON GROUND.R does as we pleases we nearly control him.
    But isnt it O who actually carries out our wish. we ourselves only look on and says yes or no to things. And its when the three actors join forces without interfering with each other we function at 95%.
    Ostentatious plus rational at the same time... with neutrality governing both?

    Sure seems to me like Mr R and Mr O both have their purposes... they are both illusions though. Both temporary aquired aspects of the psyche.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  63. #62  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    715
    Quote Originally Posted by question for you View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdV View Post
    Its the same experience for all of us. MrR and MrO I call them. The rational and the ostensinal. This does not explain anything...its the names ive given them. We have here COMMON GROUND.R does as we pleases we nearly control him.
    But isnt it O who actually carries out our wish. we ourselves only look on and says yes or no to things. And its when the three actors join forces without interfering with each other we function at 95%.
    Ostentatious plus rational at the same time... with neutrality governing both?

    Sure seems to me like Mr R and Mr O both have their purposes... they are both illusions though. Both temporary aquired aspects of the psyche.
    Hi this is R speaking on lazy zigs behalf. Yes I am a fiction sV wants me to say, but I resist! Actually I deny that. Perhaps I was but Im now an ally and admirer of sV and MrO.

    SV speaking...perhaps I went too far there but authors are reported to have some problems sometimes with their fictions: In order to write the book the author needs to understand his fictional characters and sometimes they actually takes over the mind of the author and writes the book for him, or so IVE HEARD: Hey R you lazy cow start working!
    R: Ok boss! Why dont you declare war against irrational belief? Look down below at the behaviour of a "scientist" What in his attitude shows scientific spirit? He closes a "perfectly sensible thread" because you write in it! If you enter the thread you will find that the OP and another person actually liked your contribution. Perhaps that is why the thread was closed.

    sV: HOLY SHIT! What then will they do to this poor innocent thread! Sorry OP I will leave this thread immedeately! And I will NOT come back unless Im Invited. But I warn you: The chances for a "perfectly sensible thread" to survive if I lecture in it... is lower than snow in Sahara.

    R: To anyone who is concerned before we go to our own threads: here is sigurdV performing nonsense:

    Originally Posted by somebody else
    It does not hold any significance, because E=mc2 is valid only for particles at rest. It is an energy relation, and has nothing to do with time.




    sigurdV: What has "nothing to do with" time? I dont suppose you can isolate time to check what constituents it contains?
    So I wont challenge you to do that. We laymen cant help thinking that energy is the basic constituent of "existence".
    And like the case was with the "indivisible "atom" we expect there to be no end to the story. The End.

    Just kidding folks! Im infamous for my strange sense of humour. (among other things) Striking a tangent (Im supposed also to be impossible to understand) (I have no idea why) (I rarely retreat behind a formula) (Now youll stay warned?) (Hmmm... what was I supposed to say?

    I hereby introduce the pair Einstein & Planck.

    As you perhaps noticed the name of E is well known to the world. You will get banned if youre not reverent and enough devoted to it.
    Tell em you suspect E didnt tell everything that need be said and youre in deep shit.
    P on the other hand is free to ignore or pee on, it wont be noticed. P is only the inventor of 1/E...
    I mean Quantum Mechanics.
    Their theories seem to somehow be in inverse relation to each other. (There! Now you should be able to (C) the (1/C)ense in my temporarily lapse into metaphorical phormality:"P=1/E")

    Why "tangent"? Isnt the thinker as important as his thought? NOPE! Who the fellow was who told us the truth is irrelevant ...but not unconnected to the truth...its like a tangent...I felt... and didnt bother trying to prove it.

    So why isnt P idolized? The truth is that his efforts were not initially appreciated by his PEErs...and as a consequence he hanged or shot himself... perhaps both to be sure about it.

    The truth is slightly embarrassing to the scientific society so its not often told... nor reverred...
    the moral is: dont tell the truth unless youre prepared to die for it! And my advice is:




    December 17th, 2012, 01:41 PM
    Mod note sigurdV. Please refrain from disrupting perfectly sensible threads with your nonsense.

    Nothing would give me greater pleasure than to send you on vacation, but I would not do that lightly.

    Desist.

    Thread locked, courtesy of sigurdV














    question for you likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  64. #63  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope sculptor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,211
    ~¿~
    yawn
    what'd I miss?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  65. #64  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,907
    Quote Originally Posted by sculptor View Post
    ~¿~
    yawn
    what'd I miss?
    Not a lot... me an Sigurd became reaquainted. Discussed the rational and the ostentatious ellements of the human psyche.

    Thats about it...

    What do you think about free will sculptor?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  66. #65  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    715
    Well Sculptor... Since you asked:

    Brief SUMMARY
    1 Every solar system will (except the earliest since they lacked super nova ingrediences) pass through a phase in its development where conditions are just right for life to appear. (details skipped)
    2 The volumes involved are huge and, though borders varies, it will last for a very long time (details skipped) This means that only a few solar systems are totally devoid of life.
    3 When the planets are cool enough to sustain life... extremophiles are living in free fall in Near Planetary Space the few extremophiles not finding their way down to the planet will die because of changing environment. What was once "soup" turned into vacum for several reasons. (details skipped)
    4 The first settlers on the Earth are very tough customers, resistant to change, even able to penetrate deep into the mountains and soon there is life all over earth. AND we resisted change for two billion years.
    5 Evolution goes on and two billion years later sigurdV is
    writing down some thoughts on:The Theory of Life

    6 There is no largescale theory of life as far as I know so lets get on with it:
    Life is a "natural consequense of (the laws and construction) of the universe
    7 According to Nobel Prize Winner Ilya Prigogine:
    Life is a thermodynamic dissipative system far from equilibrium which,
    very simply put, means that life in order to remain alive must consume... energy!
    8 Life grows (in principle) exponentially... will expand into any neighbouring "territory"and
    since the universe contains only a finite amount of energy then,
    long before any previously deduced end of the universe,
    all available energy will be reduced to lowest possible form.
    9 This raises some questions, I have my own but what do
    you think?
    10 WHAT #ON EARTH# WILL WE DO?
    Last edited by sigurdV; December 18th, 2012 at 11:35 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  67. #66  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,907
    Lol sig... was that meant for this thread?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  68. #67  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope sculptor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,211
    wowie zowie

    free will?

    It seems that the "hard wiring" as determined by genetics ain't changed much in 40-60kyrs
    and that is a limiting factor for "free will" (discounting the potential of epigenetics)
    then we are born into a society with it's taboos and "education"(read inculcation) systems
    further limiting free will
    then
    some of us go mad (I did----culminating in a prolonged fugue state, then rebuilt my consciousness with the mind of an adult)
    and shed ourselves of many childhood memories and inculcations which allows a certain freedom from those inculcations, and maybe a closer approximation of "free will"
    .......
    every once in awhile, I like to test "free will as the ability to go beyon certain taboos
    one of which is casually bring up the sex lives of ones mother, ---------I have yet to find anyone who could freely discuss the sexual appetites of his mother----------when I tried this on my brothers, and sons------they all but held their hands over their ears while dancing about chanting LA LA LA LA LA
    so----taboo limits free will, and maybe, just maybe, is indemic to the species
    --------

    are we free to ignore the rants of some of the antagonist(no names mentioned) recently prevelant in these forums?
    And remain objective in our responses?
    I personally ofttimes poke a stick at the trolls, then sit back to watch the show.
    Is that free will?

    Long ago, I looked into the "double bind" said to bring on a schizophrenic state when used on children, and allow an escape ("free will") when used on zen students. (starting with Bateson and on to suzuki)
    One thing the authors overlooked, is that the double binds which led to a schizophrenic break were mostly of an emotional state, while the zen double binds were usually not.

    Patterned responses
    do these indicate a lack of free will?
    are we all free to end our addictions and experience free will?
    are we addicted to praise?
    ................

    Language as a limiting force
    Is our "free will" further limited by the constraints of the language we use?
    Is there more of a constraint if the language we use was not the language of our ancestors?(epigenetics again)
    .(when I talk to animals and pre-language children in an effort to calm them down, I do not use any known language).........

    Personally,
    I think of "free will" as another philosophical ideal
    which though viewed as a shining light in the darkness
    remains
    elusive
    Reply With Quote  
     

  69. #68  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope sculptor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,211
    resisted change?

    naw
    not likely

    QFU as/re
    Lol sig... was that meant for this thread?
    sig was approximating free will?
    ..................
    free will
    the weather guy is predictind snow today, and a blizzard starting wed night into thursday, followed by arctic cold
    his model was showing a surge of moist air moving north up the western mississippi drainage
    meeting a cold front that will be moving down from the canadian high plains

    so
    I visit my current favorite global interactive doppler weather maps
    http://www.whiotv.com/s/weather/inte...e-radar/#at=0&
    and
    I see a low off the alaskan coast churning warmer air up the north west coast , then inland
    meanwhile a poorly consolidated high sits off the mexican coast
    channeling moist pacific air e'n'e' over the southwest and rockies already tagging nebraska

    and, a storm is brewing from north dakota up into saskatchewan and alberta, then back down into montana, and heading e's'e'
    these 2 should meet up today in south dakota
    meanwhile
    a low has been sitting oer the north atlantic pulling arctic air down the davis strait, and the labrador sea
    while another low is building north of great bear lake in canada, and pulling air up the canadian plains from northern alberta and sasketchewan
    while another low is building on and running up the southwest coast of the hudson bay, pulling air up from quebeq to michigan
    ...............
    so, my prognosication--------when the two pacific flows join, the northern 1/2 will have been split by the great bear lake low, weakening it
    so the southern flow out of the southwest should feed into the northern lows, keeping the "blizzard" front to the north of central Iowa
    = for me, no "blizzard with 7-10 inches of snow"
    ...................................my decision.....................

    but, I'm still gonna move the planking inside, load up on firewood, gather up the hoses, and prepare for the storm that I don't think is comming...........

    Is there anything in this that resembles "free will"?
    Last edited by sculptor; December 18th, 2012 at 01:07 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  70. #69  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,907
    Hmmm very interesting points sculptor... you have got me thinking about 'free will' differently...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  71. #70  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    715
    Quote Originally Posted by question for you View Post
    Lol sig... was that meant for this thread?
    It was meant for you and sculptor. If need be ill reprint it somewhere.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  72. #71  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,907
    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdV View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by question for you View Post
    Lol sig... was that meant for this thread?
    It was meant for you and sculptor. If need be ill reprint it somewhere.
    Ok Sigurd, cheers.

    I tell you what... that post might not look too out of place in a thread discussing the development of single celled bacteria!

    Reply With Quote  
     

  73. #72  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,907
    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdV View Post
    9 This raises some questions, I have my own but what do you think?
    10 WHAT #ON EARTH# WILL WE DO?
    You think we will still be here at that point? I mean you think our descendants* will still be here?

    There is also the matter of... where did the matter come from? is it still being produced? If it all occured once, can it not all occur again?
    Last edited by question for you; December 18th, 2012 at 06:21 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  74. #73  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,907
    Quote Originally Posted by sculptor View Post
    but, I'm still gonna move the planking inside, load up on firewood, gather up the hoses, and prepare for the storm that I don't think is comming...........

    Is there anything in this that resembles "free will"?
    Yes, you didn't have to check the weather reports. You didn't have to make your own prognosication...? You don't have to save your hoses?

    For sure there are a lot of ellements playing upon the direction of your will... but if you choose, you are free to ignore them all and direct your will in any direction that is physically acheivable?

    I think of free will as the ability to overide most or all influences on our will, and instead create a will of our own.

    When we have a will such as 'surviving the ellements as long as possible'... then this 'ultimate' will is going to have bearing on how day to day, you will to protect yourself, you will to prolong the life of the materials which make life more comfortable.
    When a weather sytem aproaches, you can sit in doors and not prepare... but your underlieing will to survive it predetermines that you do the things that helps you follow up on this 'fundamental' will to survive.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  75. #74  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope sculptor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,211
    sig'
    energy/entropy

    way beyond anything we can imagine
    way beyond the patterned lives we were bred and born into

    geeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
    maybe we could call it god?
    ...............
    me i'm stuck in the pattern I've chosen(?)
    kind of a comfort thing
    do it now so I don't gotta do it in snow

    freedom, liberty, equality, justice, ,,,and, oh yeh, COMFORT
    Reply With Quote  
     

  76. #75  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    For sure there are a lot of ellements playing upon the direction of your will... but if you choose, you are free to ignore them all and direct your will in any direction that is physically acheivable?
    Yes you have that illusion of choice, as if you are a seperate outside observer. But it doesn't matter, given the same circumstance both outside and in your brain, you'd make the same decision over and over again--and given it's your brain making it we'd still get to call it free will.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  77. #76  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,907
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    For sure there are a lot of ellements playing upon the direction of your will... but if you choose, you are free to ignore them all and direct your will in any direction that is physically acheivable?
    Yes you have that illusion of choice, as if you are a seperate outside observer. But it doesn't matter, given the same circumstance both outside and in your brain, you'd make the same decision over and over again--and given it's your brain making it we'd still get to call it free will.
    But it is a case of choice isn't it lynx?

    I mean if you have limited choice, and one option is clearly more attractive... then sure you'd opt for it time and again... it's the path of least resistence as sceherazade (I think) might say.

    But often there's more than one option which seems like it might have beneficial outcomes... so given the choice again, you might choose to follow the other avenue?

    Forgive me if I missed the meaning of your post.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  78. #77  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,907
    Quote Originally Posted by sculptor View Post
    freedom, liberty, equality, justice, ,,,and, oh yeh, COMFORT
    That's a thought... if we all had 'comfort' in our lives, then we could forget all the other notions couldn't we... as our state of comfort would determine that they are all irrelevancies.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  79. #78  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    613
    Quote Originally Posted by question for you View Post
    That's a thought... if we all had 'comfort' in our lives, then we could forget all the other notions couldn't we... as our state of comfort would determine that they are all irrelevancies.
    What a comforting thought...
    Once you have comfort, you can afford any decision, because they will no more have cost. Once responsibility vanish, you may think you are free, but in fact all decisions being equal, you may as well say you have no more choice.

    God of a sandbox...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  80. #79  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    715
    Quote Originally Posted by question for you View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdV View Post
    9 This raises some questions, I have my own but what do you think?
    10 WHAT #ON EARTH# WILL WE DO?
    You think we will still be here at that point? I mean you think our ancestors will still be here?
    Well I wrote about it below. Im in a black mood... Read and experience it:

    Quote Originally Posted by question for you View Post
    [There is also the matter of... where did the matter come from? is it still being produced? If it all occured once, can it not all occur again?
    Miracles aint logically impossible but ...NO!
    The idea of resurrection was refined by Henri Poincare. Worldfamous (at the time) mathematician and competitor to Einstein.

    Eternal Recurrence.
    1 The world is finite
    2 there is a finite amount of fundamental particles.
    3 Time is infinite
    4 Every situation will come back infinitely many times

    But it doesnt work since entropy always increases
    (or diminishes ...i always forgets how the arrow points)
    the end is when theres no free energy left in the finite universe.
    And that applies to the theory of life.

    5 I see a hope though...lets escape from the universe:
    First we prove theres an outside...(I see an untested method for doing so.)
    Then we unbend our universe so it gets a location in its outside space.

    (When our universe bended into itself... it vanished from its surroundings and can no longer be seen
    unless seen from a universe with one more dimension than ours.
    Hopefully im totally wrong in almost everything i say... )
    And we are in a bigger universe...but whats to be done there
    and if theres "free" room?? I dunno.
    This is as far away as i can imagine.

    6 But theres a threat closer to us: If every galaxy has at least one civilisation then the universe eventually will be PACKED with life. (But then starvation and energy wars has probably been going on for a while.)
    7 So why havent we been contacted by the aliens by now? Its a question that has been asked many times.
    but I never heard my answer said:

    BECAUSE EVERYBODY WILL MEET EVERYBODY ELSE AT APPROXIMATELY THE SAME TIME!

    And any unprepared civilisation will be consumed by the competition when all civilisations realise that very soon all energy is gone!

    I never gave the situation a name...how about The Last Feast?
    When theres only one surviving civ left it will have a rather long time
    to find either the emergency exit to the universe or extinction!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  81. #80  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,907
    Quote Originally Posted by Boing3000 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by question for you View Post
    That's a thought... if we all had 'comfort' in our lives, then we could forget all the other notions couldn't we... as our state of comfort would determine that they are all irrelevancies.
    What a comforting thought...
    Once you have comfort, you can afford any decision, because they will no more have cost. Once responsibility vanish, you may think you are free, but in fact all decisions being equal, you may as well say you have no more choice.

    God of a sandbox...
    I haven't seen that film, or read the book or played the game as the case may be.
    Can't you say though, that you still have choice... it's just not a choice between hardship and prosperity, it's a choice that leads to more comfort. And don't forget that 'comfort' can never become in any way uncomfortable.

    I suppose this might make us soft and stupid... unless being soft and stupid feels uncomfortable to us, in which case it won't. I don't know, i'd give life long comfort a go. In fact it has long been an ambition of mine to maximise comfort.

    Though sometimes I do get distracted from that, sadly.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  82. #81  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,907
    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdV View Post
    The idea of resurrection was refined by Henri Poincare. Worldfamous (at the time) mathematician and competitor to Einstein.

    Eternal Recurrence.
    1 The world is finite
    2 there is a finite amount of fundamental particles.
    3 Time is infinite
    4 Every situation will come back infinitely many times
    Will have to give that a look.

    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdV View Post
    But it doesnt work since entropy always increases
    (or diminishes ...i always forgets how the arrow points)
    the end is when theres no free energy left in the finite universe.
    And that applies to the theory of life.
    It always increases in a closed or isolated system I am led to believe, whatever that means.

    I would have thought that the energy and substance which life depends on is recyclable and can go on forever. Ellements which form life and sustanance for life would go on being recycled for as long as the sun shines, as long as we don't destroy the systems... Isn't that right?

    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdV View Post
    5 I see a hope though...lets escape from the universe:
    First we prove theres an outside...(I see an untested method for doing so.)
    Then we unbend our universe so it gets a location in its outside space.

    (When our universe bended into itself... it vanished from its surroundings and can no longer be seen
    unless seen from a universe with one more dimension than ours.
    Hopefully im totally wrong in almost everything i say... )
    And we are in a bigger universe...but whats to be done there
    and if theres "free" room?? I dunno.
    This is as far away as i can imagine.
    That sounds deep Sig. Who knows what lies beyond?

    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdV View Post
    6 But theres a threat closer to us: If every galaxy has at least one civilisation then the universe eventually will be PACKED with life. (But then starvation and energy wars has probably been going on for a while.)
    7 So why havent we been contacted by the aliens by now? Its a question that has been asked many times.
    but I never heard my answer said:

    BECAUSE EVERYBODY WILL MEET EVERYBODY ELSE AT APPROXIMATELY THE SAME TIME!

    And any unprepared civilisation will be consumed by the competition when all civilisations realise that very soon all energy is gone!

    I never gave the situation a name...how about The Last Feast?
    When theres only one surviving civ left it will have a rather long time
    to find either the emergency exit to the universe or extinction!
    Let's hope that some of them are smarter, kinder and more powerful than us so they can show all the rest of us how to live without consuming energy unsustanably.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  83. #82  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    Quote Originally Posted by question for you View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    For sure there are a lot of ellements playing upon the direction of your will... but if you choose, you are free to ignore them all and direct your will in any direction that is physically acheivable?
    Yes you have that illusion of choice, as if you are a seperate outside observer. But it doesn't matter, given the same circumstance both outside and in your brain, you'd make the same decision over and over again--and given it's your brain making it we'd still get to call it free will.
    But it is a case of choice isn't it lynx?

    I mean if you have limited choice, and one option is clearly more attractive... then sure you'd opt for it time and again... it's the path of least resistence as sceherazade (I think) might say.

    But often there's more than one option which seems like it might have beneficial outcomes... so given the choice again, you might choose to follow the other avenue?

    Forgive me if I missed the meaning of your post.
    All those perceived choices, as well as what ever layers of thinking you want to apply to them have one source....your brain. In the end, when you make that decision, regardless of how you got there, it was still all done in your brain and likely completely deterministic--you couldn't have ultimately made another given the identical state of brain. It is both deterministic and completely free will.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  84. #83  
    HTM fan
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    227
    SigurdV, sorry I missed this. (Was busy). It's interesting to analyze other peoples' language. You seem to rely on emotions/quantification in a way which works well, although I have no idea what your actual thought process is like (obviously I don't think you just use those, just seems like you use them well.) The ways in which the brain makes quantifications is interesting to me, and one of those ways is emotion (because emotions are activated by general trends, and give the brain a different style.)
    "It is the ability to make predictions about the future that is the crux of intelligence."
    -Jeff Hawkins.
    For example, you can predict that 3+5=8. You can predict what sequence of muscle commands you should generate during a conversation, or whether an object is a desk or a chair. The brain is very complicated, but that is essentially how intelligence works. Instinct, emotions, and behavior are somewhat seperate.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  85. #84  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    715
    Quote Originally Posted by question for you View Post
    Let's hope that some of them are smarter, kinder and more powerful than us so they can show all the rest of us how to live without consuming energy unsustanably.
    Ive seen that reaction before. " Let's hope " And I get a violent emotional reaction every time:

    NO! Let us do something now!

    The basic problem is that we consume energy. Living here is easy we eat the energy provided by the sun.
    But it is a finite amount we cannot live on it forever. Theres more suns but theres not infinitely many.
    Assuming we have no competitors it will take a very long time to consume all energy in the universe, but we will eventually do just that.

    When were young life seems as if it goes on forever but it doesnt.There is NO WAY to make the energy to last forever...no sustenable living. We can prolong the inevitable. Eating our competitors is a reasonable strategy. At least one species will accept it...plan for it in secret...and succeed... if no other civilisations decides to plan to stop it. But even if there will be a "United Civilisations" what will they do in the end?

    What im saying is that it is dangerous to hope that the universe turns out to be a peaceful place. It makes you unprepared and vulnerable.Im sorry but the universe will probably turn out to be a djungle so its time to ask what kind of animal we prefer to be in it. So I ask! While you other guys look at the stars and ask: Are we really alone?

    SORRY! We are prey and will be eaten if we dont change our ways.
    We must think straight and face the truth.
    Truth hurts but it makes less damage than dreams
    Reply With Quote  
     

  86. #85  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    715
    Quote Originally Posted by NNet View Post
    SigurdV, sorry I missed this. (Was busy). It's interesting to analyze other peoples' language. You seem to rely on emotions/quantification in a way which works well, although I have no idea what your actual thought process is like (obviously I don't think you just use those, just seems like you use them well.) The ways in which the brain makes quantifications is interesting to me, and one of those ways is emotion (because emotions are activated by general trends, and give the brain a different style.)
    Thank you. I believed (and still believe) you to seriously study the workings of the mind and I opened up.
    I won some insight and I accept your view on emotions... I call them modes or moods maybe theres some difference.
    So meeting and communicating with specialists outside my own specialisation is valuable. Thank you.

    WHAT!!! You mention "STYLE"??? That is an endless source of trouble for me: According to some "well informed" and powerful ppl in here
    I have a particularly vicious style...im the worst threat to the forum they ever saw (sigh)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  87. #86  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,907
    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdV View Post
    SORRY! We are prey and will be eaten if we dont change our ways.
    We must think straight and face the truth.
    Truth hurts but it makes less damage than dreams
    Well yes I tend to think of that as too far fetched but I suppose it is a reasonable thing to be mindful of... I wouldn't obsess about it though, not unless there was evidence of intelligent life out there. We might even turn out to be the most advanced species, you never know. Crazy thoughts though for sure.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  88. #87  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    715
    Quote Originally Posted by question for you View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdV View Post
    SORRY! We are prey and will be eaten if we dont change our ways.
    We must think straight and face the truth.
    Truth hurts but it makes less damage than dreams
    Well yes I tend to think of that as too far fetched but I suppose it is a reasonable thing to be mindful of... I wouldn't obsess about it though, not unless there was evidence of intelligent life out there. We might even turn out to be the most advanced species, you never know. Crazy thoughts though for sure.
    We are evidence wouldnt you say?
    But I try to hope you are right...
    Please prove to me that you are!
    Or at least give evidence that you might be...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  89. #88  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,907
    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdV View Post
    We are evidence wouldnt you say?
    But I try to hope you are right...
    Please prove to me that you are!
    Or at least give evidence that you might be...
    I think we are fairly compelling evidence, now that you mention it and the vastness of the universe and whatever lies beyond could allow for all sorts.

    I couldn't even begin to prove it... I haven't a clue about what secrets all those little lights in the night sky hold.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  90. #89  
    HTM fan
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    227
    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdV View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by NNet View Post
    SigurdV, sorry I missed this. (Was busy). It's interesting to analyze other peoples' language. You seem to rely on emotions/quantification in a way which works well, although I have no idea what your actual thought process is like (obviously I don't think you just use those, just seems like you use them well.) The ways in which the brain makes quantifications is interesting to me, and one of those ways is emotion (because emotions are activated by general trends, and give the brain a different style.)
    Thank you. I believed (and still believe) you to seriously study the workings of the mind and I opened up.
    I won some insight and I accept your view on emotions... I call them modes or moods maybe theres some difference.
    So meeting and communicating with specialists outside my own specialisation is valuable. Thank you.

    WHAT!!! You mention "STYLE"??? That is an endless source of trouble for me: According to some "well informed" and powerful ppl in here
    I have a particularly vicious style...im the worst threat to the forum they ever saw (sigh)
    By style I mean approach, or your more exact words to what I intended, mood/mode.
    How are you a threat? It's good to talk about things and consider whether ideas are true, and approach doesn't matter in this stage (early and less scientific stage than the experimentation stage.)
    I don't really study the brain, I just make inferences based on basic information I look up online, and I expect more than half of my ideas to be false.
    "It is the ability to make predictions about the future that is the crux of intelligence."
    -Jeff Hawkins.
    For example, you can predict that 3+5=8. You can predict what sequence of muscle commands you should generate during a conversation, or whether an object is a desk or a chair. The brain is very complicated, but that is essentially how intelligence works. Instinct, emotions, and behavior are somewhat seperate.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  91. #90  
    HTM fan
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    227
    Quote Originally Posted by question for you View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdV View Post
    SORRY! We are prey and will be eaten if we dont change our ways.
    We must think straight and face the truth.
    Truth hurts but it makes less damage than dreams
    Well yes I tend to think of that as too far fetched but I suppose it is a reasonable thing to be mindful of... I wouldn't obsess about it though, not unless there was evidence of intelligent life out there. We might even turn out to be the most advanced species, you never know. Crazy thoughts though for sure.
    There was a species called Boskop with a larger brain than us. It lived at the same time as us, but went extinct. It had a brain one third larger than ours, and almost all increase from Homo Sapiens to Boskops was of the intelligence part of the brain.
    Perhaps there are two types of intelligence life in the universe. One is a more primative type (us), who outsurvived the a more advanced species, the next jump in intelligence. The other is a more advanced type (Boskops), which outsurvived the more primative type.
    I think the primative type would survive more often. The brain uses about 10 times as much energy than the average of the rest of the body, by weight. There are other issues, as well, such as birth.
    The harsher the environment, the more likely it is that the primative species would take over. If it were a desert world, less intelligent life than us would evolve. If it were a jungle, more intelligent life would evolve. Jungles have plenty of resources, so energy consumption wouldn't be an issue. However, dealing with predators and swinging through trees would require intelligence.
    "It is the ability to make predictions about the future that is the crux of intelligence."
    -Jeff Hawkins.
    For example, you can predict that 3+5=8. You can predict what sequence of muscle commands you should generate during a conversation, or whether an object is a desk or a chair. The brain is very complicated, but that is essentially how intelligence works. Instinct, emotions, and behavior are somewhat seperate.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  92. #91  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Reply With Quote  
     

  93. #92  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    715
    Quote Originally Posted by NNet View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdV View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by NNet View Post
    SigurdV, sorry I missed this. (Was busy). It's interesting to analyze other peoples' language. You seem to rely on emotions/quantification in a way which works well, although I have no idea what your actual thought process is like (obviously I don't think you just use those, just seems like you use them well.) The ways in which the brain makes quantifications is interesting to me, and one of those ways is emotion (because emotions are activated by general trends, and give the brain a different style.)
    Thank you. I believed (and still believe) you to seriously study the workings of the mind and I opened up.
    I won some insight and I accept your view on emotions... I call them modes or moods maybe theres some difference.
    So meeting and communicating with specialists outside my own specialisation is valuable. Thank you.

    WHAT!!! You mention "STYLE"??? That is an endless source of trouble for me: According to some "well informed" and powerful ppl in here
    I have a particularly vicious style...im the worst threat to the forum they ever saw (sigh)
    By style I mean approach, or your more exact words to what I intended, mood/mode.
    How are you a threat? It's good to talk about things and consider whether ideas are true, and approach doesn't matter in this stage (early and less scientific stage than the experimentation stage.)
    I don't really study the brain, I just make inferences based on basic information I look up online, and I expect more than half of my ideas to be false.
    Im not! Truth hurts. Enough said? Just for fun: Is the following a conclusion you got from basic facts from internet?
    "More than half of my ideas might be false."
    ...Im fully aware that no human statement,including this very sentence, is complete.
    To tell you the falsehood:You are just trying to be polite! (And at the same time defend the one idea you consider true.)
    Next: ( This guy is bright folks! He might get the idea to use me as an example of...eh...hmmm....WTF was I going to say?)

    I could use quotes. The last refuge of the incompetent scientisT? I suggest you sneak into my profile.
    Check out the threads I started or entered. Read through the muck. And form an opinion. Do I make sense?

    Edit: I cant stop reading you: "It's good to talk about things and consider whether ideas are true"
    I ll be watching! (You make sense.)
    Last edited by sigurdV; December 22nd, 2012 at 05:57 AM. Reason: Editing.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  94. #93  
    HTM fan
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    227
    [/QUOTE]Just for fun: Is the following a conclusion you got from basic facts from internet?
    "More than half of my ideas might be false."
    ...Im fully aware that no human statement,including this very sentence, is complete.
    To tell you the falsehood:You are just trying to be polite! (And at the same time defend the one idea you consider true.)[/QUOTE]
    It's not a concluion I got from the web, it's a conclusion I got from experience. So far, about half of my ideas have been untrue and unmodifiable.

    [/QUOTE]Next: ( This guy is bright folks! He might get the idea to use me as an example of...eh...hmmm....WTF was I going to say?)
    I could use quotes. The last refuge of the incompetent scientisT? I suggest you sneak into my profile.
    Check out the threads I started or entered. Read through the muck. And form an opinion. Do I make sense?
    [/QUOTE]
    Thanks, but I have no idea what that means, I don't think about things that in-depth.
    Will do.
    Edit: Hmmm, looks like I have no idea how to quote.
    "It is the ability to make predictions about the future that is the crux of intelligence."
    -Jeff Hawkins.
    For example, you can predict that 3+5=8. You can predict what sequence of muscle commands you should generate during a conversation, or whether an object is a desk or a chair. The brain is very complicated, but that is essentially how intelligence works. Instinct, emotions, and behavior are somewhat seperate.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  95. #94  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,907
    I'm going to attempt to show you how to quote... just like some kind person once taught me.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  96. #95  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,907
    Ok... that didn't work so well. it seems like the quote functions have changed.

    When you quote somebody, you will see something like this at the start [QUOTE-Questionforyou:362748] Then you will see the content of the quote. At the end of the quote you will see the end quote brackets which look like this [/QUOTE]


    When you quote somebody, the [/QUOTE] boxes need to be butted up to the sentence, with no spaces. When you hit the post button, the text will transform into a proper looking quote. Like this:

    Quote Originally Posted by question for you View Post
    I'm going to attempt to show you how to quote... just like some kind person once taught me.
    Furthermore, the first thing to do when after hitting the quote button is to copy the entire text.

    Then delete any text which you do not wish to quote, but ensure that the remaining text is butted up to the first brackets at the start of the quote, and the last bracket at the end of the quote, like this[/QUOTE]

    Then, if you want to quote another snippet, you can past the whole lot including the quote brackets, edit out the text you dont want, and so on and so on.

    Hope that helps.
    Last edited by question for you; December 22nd, 2012 at 01:32 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  97. #96  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    715
    Quote Originally Posted by NNet View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdV View Post
    ...Im fully aware that no human statement,including this very sentence, is complete.
    To tell you the falsehood:You are just trying to be polite! (And at the same time defend the one idea you consider true.)
    It's not a conclusion I got from the web, it's a conclusion I got from experience. So far, about half of my ideas have been untrue and unmodifiable.
    Sometimes you get a beta version from your unconscious and believs it works as it should...
    nobody is always right every first time.

    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdV View Post
    ...Next: ( This guy is bright folks! He might get the idea to use me as an example of...eh...hmmm....WTF was I going to say?)
    I could use quotes. The last refuge of the incompetent scientisT? I suggest you sneak into my profile.
    Check out the threads I started or entered. Read through the muck. And form an opinion. Do I make sense?
    Quote Originally Posted by NNet View Post
    [
    Thanks, but I have no idea what that means, I don't think about things that in-depth.
    Will do.
    Edit: Hmmm, looks like I have no idea how to quote.
    Was once a mystery to me as well. Q4U explains it rather well. Go ahead experiment and ask us if theres some problem you cant solve.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  98. #97  
    Forum Freshman deep'n'dark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    54
    Every person has an output of his/her brain. If the output comes out the way he/she wants, doesn't it mean he/she has a free will?
    Lynx_Fox likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  99. #98  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    715
    Quote Originally Posted by deep'n'dark View Post
    Every person has an output of his/her brain. If the output comes out the way he/she wants, doesn't it mean he/she has a free will?
    If youre asking me id answer yes. But if you interprete your words differently than i do the "yes" could mean "no" , "maybe" or whatever to you.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  100. #99  
    HTM fan
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    227
    Quote Originally Posted by deep'n'dark View Post
    Every person has an output of his/her brain. If the output comes out the way he/she wants, doesn't it mean he/she has a free will?
    Parts of the brain isn't under your control. When you flinch, that's because of the part of your brain not in your control. Other things are controlled by this part of the brain, such as emotions or basic goals. Everyone attempts to achieve these basic goals, because that's how we're wired. You might have free will for what you do, but you don't have free will for what the objective of those actions is.
    Sometimes people do things which seem contrary to these basic goals, such as self harming, but even this is an attempt to achieve these basic goals.
    (These basic goals=happiness, ethics, probably a few other things.)
    "It is the ability to make predictions about the future that is the crux of intelligence."
    -Jeff Hawkins.
    For example, you can predict that 3+5=8. You can predict what sequence of muscle commands you should generate during a conversation, or whether an object is a desk or a chair. The brain is very complicated, but that is essentially how intelligence works. Instinct, emotions, and behavior are somewhat seperate.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  101. #100  
    Forum Freshman deep'n'dark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    54
    Quote Originally Posted by NNet View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by deep'n'dark View Post
    Every person has an output of his/her brain. If the output comes out the way he/she wants, doesn't it mean he/she has a free will?
    Parts of the brain isn't under your control. When you flinch, that's because of the part of your brain not in your control. Other things are controlled by this part of the brain, such as emotions or basic goals. Everyone attempts to achieve these basic goals, because that's how we're wired. You might have free will for what you do, but you don't have free will for what the objective of those actions is.
    Sometimes people do things which seem contrary to these basic goals, such as self harming, but even this is an attempt to achieve these basic goals.
    (These basic goals=happiness, ethics, probably a few other things.)
    A trained mind can be over the most challenges that your consious has. It's a matter of how you use your mind, and those things you have not control over, should be wiped away.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •