Total Posts:16|Showing Posts:1-16
Jump to topic:

Mind-Body problem

Vi_Veri
Posts: 4,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2009 4:04:56 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
So I'm writing a paper right now for my independent study at my university (the semester long study is on psychedelics and religion) - as I was writing my thoughts on Huston Smith's "Cleansing the Doors of Perception" in my paper, I re-read this quote and it brought back some thoughts...

Huston Smith, "Even people who recognize the limitations of science assume that it can handle the corporeal world, but it cannot- not in the world's fullness. The world comes to us clothed in sound and colors and fragrances, which in textbook science have no right to be there, for the electromagnetic waves that underlie those qualities are as close to them as science can get."

I then ran across this while attempting some research online about the problem:

Thomas Huxley, "How it is that anything so remarkable as a state of consciousness comes about as a result of irritating nervous tissue, is just as unaccountable as the appearance of the Djinn, when Aladdin rubbed his lamp."


I'm wondering what your guys' beliefs are on the mind-body issue - why we have qualitative phenomenal experience.
I could give a f about no haters as long as my ishes love me.
crackofdawn_Jr
Posts: 1,350
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2009 5:28:45 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 10/18/2009 5:10:20 PM, Vi_Veri wrote:
Northern Illinois University

Great university, my got his masters there.
There are three types of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics"
-Mark Twain

"If at first you don't succeed, redefine success"

"Therefore love moderately. Long love doth so.
Too swift arrives as tardy as too slow."
- William Shakespeare

"There must be no majority decisions, but only responsible persons, and the word 'council' must be restored to its original meaning. Surely every man will have advisers by his side, but the decision will be made by one man."
- Adolf Hitler
Vi_Veri
Posts: 4,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2009 5:51:34 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 10/18/2009 5:30:42 PM, TheSkeptic wrote:
Simple, consciousness is just an emergent phenomenon due to the physical interactions in the brain.

http://en.wikipedia.org...

Not answering the right question.
I could give a f about no haters as long as my ishes love me.
TheSkeptic
Posts: 1,362
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2009 5:57:31 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 10/18/2009 5:51:34 PM, Vi_Veri wrote:
At 10/18/2009 5:30:42 PM, TheSkeptic wrote:
Simple, consciousness is just an emergent phenomenon due to the physical interactions in the brain.


http://en.wikipedia.org...

Not answering the right question.

Ah, I just saw the title and assumed it was a broad question about consciousness. Either way, this is simply a more specific question - my response is that qualia is not non-physical nor irreducible. I believe things such as p-zombies, which Chalmers likes to employ in favor of the hard problem, can't exist.

Ultimately, there is no hard problem of consciousness at all.
crackofdawn_Jr
Posts: 1,350
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2009 5:58:26 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 10/18/2009 5:28:45 PM, crackofdawn_Jr wrote:
At 10/18/2009 5:10:20 PM, Vi_Veri wrote:
Northern Illinois University

Great university, my dad got his masters there.
There are three types of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics"
-Mark Twain

"If at first you don't succeed, redefine success"

"Therefore love moderately. Long love doth so.
Too swift arrives as tardy as too slow."
- William Shakespeare

"There must be no majority decisions, but only responsible persons, and the word 'council' must be restored to its original meaning. Surely every man will have advisers by his side, but the decision will be made by one man."
- Adolf Hitler
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2009 6:11:34 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 10/18/2009 4:04:56 PM, Vi_Veri wrote:
So I'm writing a paper right now for my independent study at my university (the semester long study is on psychedelics and religion) - as I was writing my thoughts on Huston Smith's "Cleansing the Doors of Perception" in my paper, I re-read this quote and it brought back some thoughts...

Huston Smith, "Even people who recognize the limitations of science assume that it can handle the corporeal world, but it cannot- not in the world's fullness. The world comes to us clothed in sound and colors and fragrances, which in textbook science have no right to be there, for the electromagnetic waves that underlie those qualities are as close to them as science can get."

I then ran across this while attempting some research online about the problem:

Thomas Huxley, "How it is that anything so remarkable as a state of consciousness comes about as a result of irritating nervous tissue, is just as unaccountable as the appearance of the Djinn, when Aladdin rubbed his lamp."


I'm wondering what your guys' beliefs are on the mind-body issue - why we have qualitative phenomenal experience.

Remember the issue I told you I had about you-know-what in the summer? This is it. But anyway, whatever.
President of DDO
Vi_Veri
Posts: 4,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/19/2009 12:18:16 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 10/18/2009 6:11:34 PM, theLwerd wrote:

Remember the issue I told you I had about you-know-what in the summer? This is it. But anyway, whatever.:

Sorry, I didn't think this applied.
I could give a f about no haters as long as my ishes love me.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/20/2009 12:27:38 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 10/18/2009 4:04:56 PM, Vi_Veri wrote:

Thomas Huxley, "How it is that anything so remarkable as a state of consciousness comes about as a result of irritating nervous tissue, is just as unaccountable as the appearance of the Djinn, when Aladdin rubbed his lamp."


I'm wondering what your guys' beliefs are on the mind-body issue - why we have qualitative phenomenal experience.

I have no idea who Thomas Huxley is but the issue of consciousness has always fascinated me, I find it difficult to accept that it is the product of the physical brain and have always liked to believe it has some sort of spiritual/metaphysical aspect. But this is probably wishful thinking.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
regebro
Posts: 1,152
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/20/2009 12:31:40 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 10/18/2009 5:51:34 PM, Vi_Veri wrote:
At 10/18/2009 5:30:42 PM, TheSkeptic wrote:
Simple, consciousness is just an emergent phenomenon due to the physical interactions in the brain.


http://en.wikipedia.org...

Not answering the right question.

Well, isn't he, really? Because to me the question of why we have a consciousness, and why we are conscious of the world, and have qualitative phenomena seems to be the same question.
So prove me wrong, then.
Floid
Posts: 751
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/20/2009 6:13:24 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
Huston Smith, "Even people who recognize the limitations of science assume that it can handle the corporeal world, but it cannot- not in the world's fullness. The world comes to us clothed in sound and colors and fragrances, which in textbook science have no right to be there, for the electromagnetic waves that underlie those qualities are as close to them as science can get."

Well, first off... colors really are just different frequencies of electromagnetic waves. Sounds are changes in pressure in the atmosphere and fragrances are very small particles diffused through the atmopshere. If the use of psychadelic drugs changes that perception it is because it is altering the mechanisms by which you detect those things (i.e. your nervous system), not revealing something that isn't really there.

"I have a friend who's an artist and has sometimes taken a view which I don't agree with very well. He'll hold up a flower and say "look how beautiful it is," and I'll agree. Then he says "I as an artist can see how beautiful this is but you as a scientist take this all apart and it becomes a dull thing," and I think that he's kind of nutty. First of all, the beauty that he sees is available to other people and to me too, I believe. Although I may not be quite as refined aesthetically as he is ... I can appreciate the beauty of a flower. At the same time, I see much more about the flower than he sees. I could imagine the cells in there, the complicated actions inside, which also have a beauty. I mean it's not just beauty at this dimension, at one centimeter; there's also beauty at smaller dimensions, the inner structure, also the processes. The fact that the colors in the flower evolved in order to attract insects to pollinate it is interesting; it means that insects can see the color. It adds a question: does this aesthetic sense also exist in the lower forms? Why is it aesthetic? All kinds of interesting questions which the science knowledge only adds to the excitement, the mystery and the awe of a flower. It only adds. I don't understand how it subtracts."
— Richard P. Feynman
Vi_Veri
Posts: 4,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/20/2009 1:13:30 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 10/20/2009 12:31:40 AM, regebro wrote:
At 10/18/2009 5:51:34 PM, Vi_Veri wrote:
At 10/18/2009 5:30:42 PM, TheSkeptic wrote:
Simple, consciousness is just an emergent phenomenon due to the physical interactions in the brain.


http://en.wikipedia.org...

Not answering the right question.

Well, isn't he, really? Because to me the question of why we have a consciousness, and why we are conscious of the world, and have qualitative phenomena seems to be the same question.

Maybe you should look at qualia for the right question. And he clarified later, realizing it was in fact not the right answer.
I could give a f about no haters as long as my ishes love me.
Vi_Veri
Posts: 4,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/20/2009 1:15:32 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 10/20/2009 6:13:24 AM, Floid wrote:
Huston Smith, "Even people who recognize the limitations of science assume that it can handle the corporeal world, but it cannot- not in the world's fullness. The world comes to us clothed in sound and colors and fragrances, which in textbook science have no right to be there, for the electromagnetic waves that underlie those qualities are as close to them as science can get."

Well, first off... colors really are just different frequencies of electromagnetic waves. Sounds are changes in pressure in the atmosphere and fragrances are very small particles diffused through the atmopshere. If the use of psychadelic drugs changes that perception it is because it is altering the mechanisms by which you detect those things (i.e. your nervous system), not revealing something that isn't really there.



"I have a friend who's an artist and has sometimes taken a view which I don't agree with very well. He'll hold up a flower and say "look how beautiful it is," and I'll agree. Then he says "I as an artist can see how beautiful this is but you as a scientist take this all apart and it becomes a dull thing," and I think that he's kind of nutty. First of all, the beauty that he sees is available to other people and to me too, I believe. Although I may not be quite as refined aesthetically as he is ... I can appreciate the beauty of a flower. At the same time, I see much more about the flower than he sees. I could imagine the cells in there, the complicated actions inside, which also have a beauty. I mean it's not just beauty at this dimension, at one centimeter; there's also beauty at smaller dimensions, the inner structure, also the processes. The fact that the colors in the flower evolved in order to attract insects to pollinate it is interesting; it means that insects can see the color. It adds a question: does this aesthetic sense also exist in the lower forms? Why is it aesthetic? All kinds of interesting questions which the science knowledge only adds to the excitement, the mystery and the awe of a flower. It only adds. I don't understand how it subtracts."
— Richard P. Feynman

Psychedelics really don't play into the answer here... just ran into the question while researching on them...

The question is: how do those vibrations translate to the "sound" we hear in our minds. I understand how the mechanics work, it's just the outcome that's intriguing.
I could give a f about no haters as long as my ishes love me.
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/21/2009 7:11:55 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 10/20/2009 1:15:32 PM, Vi_Veri wrote:

Psychedelics really don't play into the answer here... just ran into the question while researching on them...

The question is: how do those vibrations translate to the "sound" we hear in our minds. I understand how the mechanics work, it's just the outcome that's intriguing.

The mind converts the sound into electric impulses via the vibrations. The different frequencies of sound causes different vibrations and thus send different electric impulses. Whats the confusion here?