Total Posts:22|Showing Posts:1-22
Jump to topic:

The Split-Brain issue; we are two, not one.

Blade-of-Truth
Posts: 5,036
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2016 8:26:56 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
I've studied the mind-body issue extensively, but today a serious wrench was thrown into all of it, and I'm kinda freaking out.

Please watch the video before continuing ->

What implications and ramifications does this have for both ancient and modern philosophy that has focused on the mind-body issue, consciousness, dualism (both substance and property dualists)? We can see that David Chalmers is wrong...

What about monism?

Personally I just stumbled upon this myself, and have yet to arrive at any solid conclusions myself - so much research is needed on my end, ughhhh, I love this but boy does it raise some questions.
Debate.org Deputy Vote Moderator
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DDO Voting Guide: http://www.debate.org...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Need a judge on your debate? Nominate me! http://www.debate.org...
Blade-of-Truth
Posts: 5,036
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2016 8:29:13 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
Omg, and what about free will... this is insane.
Debate.org Deputy Vote Moderator
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DDO Voting Guide: http://www.debate.org...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Need a judge on your debate? Nominate me! http://www.debate.org...
Fkkize
Posts: 2,149
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2016 9:03:21 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/1/2016 8:26:56 PM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
I've studied the mind-body issue extensively, but today a serious wrench was thrown into all of it, and I'm kinda freaking out.

Please watch the video before continuing ->

What implications and ramifications does this have for both ancient and modern philosophy that has focused on the mind-body issue, consciousness, dualism (both substance and property dualists)? We can see that David Chalmers is wrong...

What about monism?

Personally I just stumbled upon this myself, and have yet to arrive at any solid conclusions myself - so much research is needed on my end, ughhhh, I love this but boy does it raise some questions.

McMahan wrote about this and I think it makes a rather compelling objection against dualism, especially anything related to souls. I am not sure how this makes for an argument against property dualism or panpsychism, which is Chalmer's position now, I believe.
: At 7/2/2016 3:05:07 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
:
: space contradicts logic
keithprosser
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2016 9:29:51 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
It's a v. big file for 5 minutes and didn't play properly.. perhaps it was just my connection/computer....

Most of that I was familiar with, but the 'free will' bit (which was just the briefest of mentions) was new. For those who missed it, the idea is that right-brain can do something which the left-brain doesn't know about, say picking up a particular object. When questioned left-brain will construct a completely plausible (but false) reason why the object was picked up.

If I undertand things (there is a good chance I don't) this impacts on free will because it implies the reason we do things is not the reason we think we do things, or not the reason we report for doing things even if that report is only to ourselves. We may think we are in control of our actions but all we are doing is making up after the fact rationalisations. I've posted along those lines before, but I didn't know the split-brani scenario offered any support for that interpretation of apparent free will.
keithprosser
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2016 9:54:16 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
Postscript: It plays fine now... don't let me discourage anyone from viewing it!

McMahan wrote about this and I think it makes a rather compelling objection against dualism, especially anything related to souls. I am not sure how this makes for an argument against property dualism or panpsychism, which is Chalmer's position now, I believe.

I'd agree it does give support to monist/physicalist view of the mind/brain problem. The results are very much what you might expect if minds are no more than what brains produce by virtue their action, much as dynamos produce electricity.

I don't see the 'two not one' issue as being all that big a deal unless you have the idea that a 'Self' is something more than what is produced by the operation of a bunch of brain cells. If your brain is split there are two bunches of brain cells so there will be two selves. As the brain split is not complete, the selves will also not be completely separate - I think what is observed is entirely consistent with monism and is very interesting - but not very creepy - to monist.
zmikecuber
Posts: 4,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2016 10:20:32 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/1/2016 8:26:56 PM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
I've studied the mind-body issue extensively, but today a serious wrench was thrown into all of it, and I'm kinda freaking out.

Please watch the video before continuing ->

What implications and ramifications does this have for both ancient and modern philosophy that has focused on the mind-body issue, consciousness, dualism (both substance and property dualists)? We can see that David Chalmers is wrong...

What about monism?

Personally I just stumbled upon this myself, and have yet to arrive at any solid conclusions myself - so much research is needed on my end, ughhhh, I love this but boy does it raise some questions.

So is left brain in *complete* control of the right half and vice versa? Or is it just two *parts* of your brain disagreeing, and then you make the decision?
"Delete your fvcking sig" -1hard

"primal man had the habit, when he came into contact with fire, of satisfying the infantile desire connected with it, by putting it out with a stream of his urine... Putting out the fire by micturating was therefore a kind of sexual act with a male, an enjoyment of sexual potency in a homosexual competition."
zmikecuber
Posts: 4,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2016 10:25:21 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/1/2016 8:26:56 PM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
I've studied the mind-body issue extensively, but today a serious wrench was thrown into all of it, and I'm kinda freaking out.

Please watch the video before continuing ->

What implications and ramifications does this have for both ancient and modern philosophy that has focused on the mind-body issue, consciousness, dualism (both substance and property dualists)? We can see that David Chalmers is wrong...

What about monism?

Personally I just stumbled upon this myself, and have yet to arrive at any solid conclusions myself - so much research is needed on my end, ughhhh, I love this but boy does it raise some questions.

I guess I don't see the problem entirely. If a split brain patient can have control over even the half of his brain which doesn't speak, doesnt this just show that the "self" is undivided?

Also, what about any natural response we have? Couldnt we explain the phenomena of the un-speaking side as incapable of reasoning? Language and reason are very intertwined I believe... If the one side of the brain in its own nature is incapable of reasoning, I think you could just pass it off as similar to your nerve responses. When you touch something hot, your nerves instantly respond and pull your hand away. You react before the signal even reaches your brain. Why isn't this an "intelligence" or a "consciousness" or a "self"?
"Delete your fvcking sig" -1hard

"primal man had the habit, when he came into contact with fire, of satisfying the infantile desire connected with it, by putting it out with a stream of his urine... Putting out the fire by micturating was therefore a kind of sexual act with a male, an enjoyment of sexual potency in a homosexual competition."
zmikecuber
Posts: 4,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2016 10:27:51 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/1/2016 8:26:56 PM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
I've studied the mind-body issue extensively, but today a serious wrench was thrown into all of it, and I'm kinda freaking out.

Please watch the video before continuing ->

What implications and ramifications does this have for both ancient and modern philosophy that has focused on the mind-body issue, consciousness, dualism (both substance and property dualists)? We can see that David Chalmers is wrong...

What about monism?

Personally I just stumbled upon this myself, and have yet to arrive at any solid conclusions myself - so much research is needed on my end, ughhhh, I love this but boy does it raise some questions.

So if we were to ask a split brain person a question, and give them a paper and pen, would each left and right hand answer the question differently? I mean, where's the scientific research? I'm not doubting the youtube video, just saying that it would be a good idea to look into this more and double check everything the video says.
"Delete your fvcking sig" -1hard

"primal man had the habit, when he came into contact with fire, of satisfying the infantile desire connected with it, by putting it out with a stream of his urine... Putting out the fire by micturating was therefore a kind of sexual act with a male, an enjoyment of sexual potency in a homosexual competition."
zmikecuber
Posts: 4,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2016 10:29:20 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/1/2016 8:26:56 PM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
I've studied the mind-body issue extensively, but today a serious wrench was thrown into all of it, and I'm kinda freaking out.

Please watch the video before continuing ->

What implications and ramifications does this have for both ancient and modern philosophy that has focused on the mind-body issue, consciousness, dualism (both substance and property dualists)? We can see that David Chalmers is wrong...

What about monism?

Personally I just stumbled upon this myself, and have yet to arrive at any solid conclusions myself - so much research is needed on my end, ughhhh, I love this but boy does it raise some questions.

This seems to be a type of Chinese nation argument...
"Delete your fvcking sig" -1hard

"primal man had the habit, when he came into contact with fire, of satisfying the infantile desire connected with it, by putting it out with a stream of his urine... Putting out the fire by micturating was therefore a kind of sexual act with a male, an enjoyment of sexual potency in a homosexual competition."
keithprosser
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2016 10:36:46 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
zmc - you will find the video I linked to useful. It shows an actual split brain subject being tested by being shown different object to different eyes. It shows what the first video meant.

https://www.youtube.com...
zmikecuber
Posts: 4,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2016 10:44:35 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/1/2016 10:36:46 PM, keithprosser wrote:
zmc - you will find the video I linked to useful. It shows an actual split brain subject being tested by being shown different object to different eyes. It shows what the first video meant.

https://www.youtube.com...

Cool, thanks
"Delete your fvcking sig" -1hard

"primal man had the habit, when he came into contact with fire, of satisfying the infantile desire connected with it, by putting it out with a stream of his urine... Putting out the fire by micturating was therefore a kind of sexual act with a male, an enjoyment of sexual potency in a homosexual competition."
zmikecuber
Posts: 4,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2016 10:47:56 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/1/2016 10:36:46 PM, keithprosser wrote:
zmc - you will find the video I linked to useful. It shows an actual split brain subject being tested by being shown different object to different eyes. It shows what the first video meant.

https://www.youtube.com...

So his left side of his brain can only see out of the right eye, whereas the right side sees out of the left eye?
"Delete your fvcking sig" -1hard

"primal man had the habit, when he came into contact with fire, of satisfying the infantile desire connected with it, by putting it out with a stream of his urine... Putting out the fire by micturating was therefore a kind of sexual act with a male, an enjoyment of sexual potency in a homosexual competition."
zmikecuber
Posts: 4,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2016 10:49:44 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/1/2016 10:36:46 PM, keithprosser wrote:
zmc - you will find the video I linked to useful. It shows an actual split brain subject being tested by being shown different object to different eyes. It shows what the first video meant.

https://www.youtube.com...

So, according to this video, his right side of his brain is not conscious?
"Delete your fvcking sig" -1hard

"primal man had the habit, when he came into contact with fire, of satisfying the infantile desire connected with it, by putting it out with a stream of his urine... Putting out the fire by micturating was therefore a kind of sexual act with a male, an enjoyment of sexual potency in a homosexual competition."
zmikecuber
Posts: 4,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2016 10:50:54 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/1/2016 10:36:46 PM, keithprosser wrote:
zmc - you will find the video I linked to useful. It shows an actual split brain subject being tested by being shown different object to different eyes. It shows what the first video meant.

https://www.youtube.com...

Also, according to the other video it said the left half would make up reasons for why the left half did what it did. But this guy just says "I dunno why I drew it, I just did."
"Delete your fvcking sig" -1hard

"primal man had the habit, when he came into contact with fire, of satisfying the infantile desire connected with it, by putting it out with a stream of his urine... Putting out the fire by micturating was therefore a kind of sexual act with a male, an enjoyment of sexual potency in a homosexual competition."
keithprosser
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/2/2016 5:01:43 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/1/2016 10:49:44 PM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 6/1/2016 10:36:46 PM, keithprosser wrote:
zmc - you will find the video I linked to useful. It shows an actual split brain subject being tested by being shown different object to different eyes. It shows what the first video meant.

https://www.youtube.com...

So, according to this video, his right side of his brain is not conscious?

I think it depends on what 'conscious' means. If we use the saw/hammer example, the right half must have 'registered' the saw or the bloke could not draw the correct object when asked to. But it seems the bloke did not 'know he knew' what the object was, or more precisely his left half didn't know his right half knew what it was. (Presumably in an intact brain the right half tells the left half what it knows via the corpus callosum.)

In any case as it is the left half that controls speech and the left half doesn't know anything about the saw (all it could see was the hammer) so it honestly reports 'I don't know'. (I in this case meaning 'left hemisphere').

If the right-half could access the speech centre directly it could well say 'I drew a saw because I saw a saw'.

What is not clear from what we saw in the video is whether the right-half
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/2/2016 6:09:43 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
What I want to know is this: if you split your brain in two such that both halves retained self-awareness, which "half" would you perceive as continuous of your previous self? Obviously both halves could perceive themselves as continuous of the previous person, but which half would be the one on which e.g., solipsism would want to define itself?
matt8800
Posts: 2,077
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/2/2016 6:45:55 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/1/2016 8:26:56 PM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
I've studied the mind-body issue extensively, but today a serious wrench was thrown into all of it, and I'm kinda freaking out.

Please watch the video before continuing ->

What implications and ramifications does this have for both ancient and modern philosophy that has focused on the mind-body issue, consciousness, dualism (both substance and property dualists)? We can see that David Chalmers is wrong...

What about monism?

Personally I just stumbled upon this myself, and have yet to arrive at any solid conclusions myself - so much research is needed on my end, ughhhh, I love this but boy does it raise some questions.

Very interesting. When I saw this post, I decided to do some research.

If a split brain person has two separate conscious experiences, that would imply that consciousness is simply a product of the brain. If there is still one conscious experience, that would imply that mind/body dualism is a possibility.

In the video, there was an example of a person's hands reaching for separate shirts to wear. At first, I thought this may be evidence of two separate conscious "deciders".

After doing a little research and reading http://www.philosophy.ox.ac.uk..., it appears that there is still only one conscious experience. For example, one side of the brain may resonate with the color blue but the other side of the brain may resonate with the feeling of soft. It appears that the split brain does not allow to weigh these preferences against each other.

It seems that a split brain does not produce multiple drivers of the same car. It seems that the tie rods to steer the car are broken and do not work in unison yet there remains one driver.

If there really only remains one driver of a split brain, that would seem to imply that one consciousness controls (or attempts to control) the brain and the brain controls the body. If this is true, it would seem to give further credence to dualism.

Can anyone find any information that would demonstrate there are actually two conscious experiences?
janesix
Posts: 3,467
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/2/2016 8:59:50 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/1/2016 8:26:56 PM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
I've studied the mind-body issue extensively, but today a serious wrench was thrown into all of it, and I'm kinda freaking out.

Please watch the video before continuing ->

What implications and ramifications does this have for both ancient and modern philosophy that has focused on the mind-body issue, consciousness, dualism (both substance and property dualists)? We can see that David Chalmers is wrong...

What about monism?

Personally I just stumbled upon this myself, and have yet to arrive at any solid conclusions myself - so much research is needed on my end, ughhhh, I love this but boy does it raise some questions.

I thought about this a lot last night, and I have a few ideas.

I am schizoaffective, and sometimes I have "hallucinations". One of my recurrent hallucinations/delusions is that there is another consciousness in my mind. It sometimes attempts to control my body, usually my left hand. It does sign language and talks to me if I let it.

So I thought maybe there ARE two consciousnesses, one in the left hemisphere which is me, and one in the right, which is not really me. It is my "subconscious". It lives in a timeless dream world. That is why in my dreams, I'm mostly just an observer. it doesn't have linear time, it thinks and lives by associations. It is where intuition comes from.

These are just my thoughts, and based only on personal experience.
keithprosser
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/3/2016 6:14:15 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
Thanks for sharing Janesix. I don't suppose you have been tested in laboratory conditions in the same way as split-brain subjects have but the results might be instructive. Whether your condition relates to the left/right brain thing specifically I wouldn't like to say, but there is no reason I can see why one brain can't support more than one consciousness - it might not be intended to support more than one, but according to some people the brain is the most complicated thing in the universe - which only it means it has more ways to go wrong than anything in the universe!

Matt8800 wrote
It seems that a split brain does not produce multiple drivers of the same car. It seems that the tie rods to steer the car are broken and do not work in unison yet there remains one driver.
If there really only remains one driver of a split brain, that would seem to imply that one consciousness controls (or attempts to control) the brain and the brain controls the body. If this is true, it would seem to give further credence to dualism.


It is self-evident that split-brain patients retain a great deal of mental unity - they obviously function more or less as a normal person for almost all of the time. It does not seem that split-brainers have the same subjective experience of being two consciousnesses as described by Janesix - mention of such a thing was notably absent from both videos.

But I don't see the support for dualism here, perhaps because I don't get the 'car' analogy. In the saw/hammer example the subject drew a saw with his left hand yet his left-half-brain (can we call it LHB?) plainly said 'I don't know' when asked about it. The LHB would not have directed the subject to draw a saw because it knew nothing about a saw - it only knew about a hammer. So I am asking what relates to the car, what relates to the driver (or drivers) and what to the tie rods?
Axonly
Posts: 1,802
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/7/2016 12:55:20 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/1/2016 8:29:13 PM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
Omg, and what about free will... this is insane.

RIP free will.
Meh!