The objective mind

[untermensche]

Derail.

Start a new thread if you want to know what people think of this new question.
EB

It is the topic of this thread!!

The ignorance is so deep there is no air to breath.

Me, I couldn't tell, I'm no specialist of the brain but I'm sure nobody knows as of last week...

There is no need for new threads.

Why would you distrust clear and repeated experience?

Why would you direct the arm by doing something with your mind for most of your life and distrust the experience?

What about the experience is not trustworthy?

Why would the brain lie about what is directing the arm?

The experience is that the mind is directing the arm and can prevent the arm from moving.

If the mind is not doing this then the experience is a massive delusion.

Why the delusion?

Just move the arm and have no mind at all aware of it.

 

[Speakpigeon]

Me, I couldn't tell, I'm no specialist of the brain but I'm sure nobody knows as of last week...

There is no need for new threads.

Why would you distrust clear and repeated experience?

Why would you direct the arm by doing something with your mind for most of your life and distrust the experience?

What about the experience is not trustworthy?

Why would the brain lie about what is directing the arm?

The experience is that the mind is directing the arm and can prevent the arm from moving.

If the mind is not doing this then the experience is a massive delusion.

Why the delusion?

Just move the arm and have no mind at all aware of it.

Yeah sure, it's like saying the reflection on a mirror is evidence that the mirror is moving the world. Very naively convincing explanation. You are a four year old.
EB

 

[untermensche]

Me, I couldn't tell, I'm no specialist of the brain but I'm sure nobody knows as of last week...

There is no need for new threads.

Why would you distrust clear and repeated experience?

Why would you direct the arm by doing something with your mind for most of your life and distrust the experience?

What about the experience is not trustworthy?

Why would the brain lie about what is directing the arm?

The experience is that the mind is directing the arm and can prevent the arm from moving.

If the mind is not doing this then the experience is a massive delusion.

Why the delusion?

Just move the arm and have no mind at all aware of it.

Yeah sure, it's like saying the reflection on a mirror is evidence that the mirror is moving the world. Very naively convincing explanation. You are a four year old.
EB

This does not address a word you quoted.

Why you say it is unknown.

It has no relation to anything previously said.

Pulled from your ass as they say.

 

[Speakpigeon]

Yeah sure, it's like saying the reflection on a mirror is evidence that the mirror is moving the world. Very naively convincing explanation. You are a four year old.
EB

This does not address a word you quoted.

Why you say it is unknown.

It has no relation to anything previously said.

Pulled from your ass as they say.

You're the monkey looking into that mirror.
EB

 

[untermensche]

Yeah sure, it's like saying the reflection on a mirror is evidence that the mirror is moving the world. Very naively convincing explanation. You are a four year old.
EB

This does not address a word you quoted.

Why you say it is unknown.

It has no relation to anything previously said.

Pulled from your ass as they say.

You're the monkey looking into that mirror.
EB

I suppose in some twisted way that makes sense to those who are totally lost.

What is your reason to doubt your daily experiences?

Because some monkey can see itself in a mirror?

You would need a bit more.

 

[Speakpigeon]

You're the monkey looking into that mirror.
EB

I suppose in some twisted way that makes sense to those who are totally lost.

What is your reason to doubt your daily experiences?

Because some monkey can see itself in a mirror?

You would need a bit more.

You are the monkey looking into the mirror and believing the mirror is moving the world.
EB

 

[untermensche]

You're the monkey looking into that mirror.
EB

I suppose in some twisted way that makes sense to those who are totally lost.

What is your reason to doubt your daily experiences?

Because some monkey can see itself in a mirror?

You would need a bit more.

You are the monkey looking into the mirror and believing the mirror is moving the world.
EB

What came to this conclusion?

 

[DBT]

There is no separation. Brain activity is activity performed by a brain in relation to its evolved function of acquiring information and responding to that information in both unconscious and conscious ways, regulating bodily functions, responding to external events, generating thoughts, feelings and actions.



Nope, the composition of an active brain includes electrical and chemical activity, chemical signals, ion flow/impulse transmission of information.

The brain can be held and weighed.

Irrelevant for the reasons given above; information content/processing activity.

While I have some sympathy for your position, it does seem an important point here that words are not the things they represent. "This is not a pipe"

Well, yes, but that doesn't change the meaning of anything I have said, or the things I am referring to with the use of words.

 

[DBT]

I have said that the specific activity is not known.

Many many times.

When it is known the mind can be studied scientifically.

Until then what is studied are physiological correlations to subjective reports, not the mind.

So you have nothing.

No explanations, no research, no experiments, no results, no evidence, your claims have no foundation (subjective experience alone being insufficient).

You are just making claims, saying whatever happens to appeal to your desires, even while ignoring actual research, actual experiments, actual evidence that goes against your beliefs.

You have nothing about the objective mind either.

I have said it for years and you still don't get it.

You can't make any claims about the objective mind without even knowing what it is.

All you can do is examine experience and try to explain it.

Like the universal and constant experience of willfully moving the body with the mind.

This can only be explained scientifically when there is a scientific understanding of the objective mind.

But to deny it has to be explained is wilful ignorance.

And no opinion that matters can be made with a mind that is not autonomous.

You see, you are still not offering an actual explanation for your terms and references or your claims. You just go into self defense mode without addressing the issues being raised. It just looks like a smokescreen.

 

[Speakpigeon]

You are the monkey looking into the mirror and believing the mirror is moving the world.
EB

What came to this conclusion?

Nobody here could tell what you mean. After years of you posting thousands of posts. Nobody here actually knows what are your views because you're unable to explain yourself. It seems you don't even understand the concept of explaining yourself.
EB

 

[Testy Calibrate]

The single mind can be conflicted. Most are. Many are horribly conflicted. Especially when insanity like religion is involved.

But split brain victims have incredible brain damage.

To make conclusions about the normal from the severely damaged is folly.

What we would say is that the severe brain damage we see in split brain victims destroys the normal unity of the mind.

Religion is a topic that the mind is in severe conflict with to begin with.

Using something like religion muddies the water.

You can't show me how a normal computer works by showing me how severely damaged computers work.

If you want to know how a system works, change a parameter and see what hppens.

 

[Speakpigeon]

The single mind can be conflicted. Most are. Many are horribly conflicted. Especially when insanity like religion is involved.

But split brain victims have incredible brain damage.

To make conclusions about the normal from the severely damaged is folly.

What we would say is that the severe brain damage we see in split brain victims destroys the normal unity of the mind.

Religion is a topic that the mind is in severe conflict with to begin with.

Using something like religion muddies the water.

You can't show me how a normal computer works by showing me how severely damaged computers work.

Clearly, he's just talking to himself.

It's a forum, not an echo chamber. Forums are for debate, not for publicly airing onanistic soliloquies.
EB

 

[untermensche]

The single mind can be conflicted. Most are. Many are horribly conflicted. Especially when insanity like religion is involved.

But split brain victims have incredible brain damage.

To make conclusions about the normal from the severely damaged is folly.

What we would say is that the severe brain damage we see in split brain victims destroys the normal unity of the mind.

Religion is a topic that the mind is in severe conflict with to begin with.

Using something like religion muddies the water.

You can't show me how a normal computer works by showing me how severely damaged computers work.

If you want to know how a system works, change a parameter and see what hppens.

You have to know exactly what you have changed.

Massive damage is not knowing exactly what has changed only that something has changed.

- - - Updated - - -

The single mind can be conflicted. Most are. Many are horribly conflicted. Especially when insanity like religion is involved.

But split brain victims have incredible brain damage.

To make conclusions about the normal from the severely damaged is folly.

What we would say is that the severe brain damage we see in split brain victims destroys the normal unity of the mind.

Religion is a topic that the mind is in severe conflict with to begin with.

Using something like religion muddies the water.

You can't show me how a normal computer works by showing me how severely damaged computers work.

Clearly, he's just talking to himself.

It's a forum, not an echo chamber. Forums are for debate, not for publicly airing onanistic soliloquies.
EB

You are free to add anything to the topic.

You just have nothing to add.

 

[untermensche]

You are the monkey looking into the mirror and believing the mirror is moving the world.
EB

What came to this conclusion?

Nobody here could tell what you mean. After years of you posting thousands of posts. Nobody here actually knows what are your views because you're unable to explain yourself. It seems you don't even understand the concept of explaining yourself.
EB

It is a very clear question.

Simple things seem to confuse you a lot.

 

[Speakpigeon]

Nobody here could tell what you mean. After years of you posting thousands of posts. Nobody here actually knows what are your views because you're unable to explain yourself. It seems you don't even understand the concept of explaining yourself.
EB

It is a very clear question.

Simple things seem to confuse you a lot.

I have already answered.

Me, I couldn't tell, I'm no specialist of the brain but I'm sure nobody knows as of last week. I'm quite sure the part of our mind which can report it is subjectively conscious is supported by some specific parts of the brain, while other parts support the part of our mind which either is unconscious or can't report it is conscious. For instance, a logical intuition I may have will be conscious and as such should be correlated with a specific activity in my brain, while the process to produce the same intuition would be at least apparently unconscious and should certainly be correlated with the activity of a different part of my brain. This seems to go without saying but it's also clear there's no scientific confirmation of this. And this doesn't say much since the subjectively conscious parts and the unconscious parts of our brain might well be so closely integrated together that imaging in a distinctive way the different parts might be beyond our capabilities today and perhaps for quite some time. Still, I wouldn't bet on the impossibility of doing it one day. You just need to be very patient.
EB

So, what wrong with my answer?
EB

 

[untermensche]

I'm quite sure the part of our mind which can report it is subjectively conscious is supported by some specific parts of the brain...

The "I'm" in your statement is your mind.

Your mind is sure that part of itself is generated by brain activity.

This is based on experience. A conclusion based on what your mind or other minds your mind trusts have experienced.

while other parts support the part of our mind which either is unconscious or can't report it is conscious.

You appear to be saying that the mind can be influenced in ways that are beyond the mind's ability to experience.

It is a description of some aspect of the mind.

These phantoms exist.

But I am talking about calmly and deliberately moving the arm when and how you choose.

That the mind's control is not absolute does not mean that it has no control.

 

[DBT]

But I am talking about calmly and deliberately moving the arm when and how you choose.

That the mind's control is not absolute does not mean that it has no control.

Yet you persistently ignore the mechanisms and means of your conscious experience of agency....including the many ways that it can be lost when the mechanisms and means break down.

 

[untermensche]

But I am talking about calmly and deliberately moving the arm when and how you choose.

That the mind's control is not absolute does not mean that it has no control.

Yet you persistently ignore the mechanisms and means of your conscious experience of agency....including the many ways that it can be lost when the mechanisms and means break down.

I say over and over that the autonomous contemplative mind is generated by the reflexive brain.

And when the reflexive brain has dysfunction this can also cause dysfunction of the mind.

But when the brain is operating properly so is the autonomous contemplative mind.

 

[DBT]

But I am talking about calmly and deliberately moving the arm when and how you choose.

That the mind's control is not absolute does not mean that it has no control.

Yet you persistently ignore the mechanisms and means of your conscious experience of agency....including the many ways that it can be lost when the mechanisms and means break down.

I say over and over that the autonomous contemplative mind is generated by the reflexive brain.

And when the reflexive brain has dysfunction this can also cause dysfunction of the mind.

But when the brain is operating properly so is the autonomous contemplative mind.

You do say that. You do say these things. Repeating what you say and claim is not enough.

Your problem lies in not giving any explanations for how such autonomy is possible.....or the chance of ever providing a shred of evidence that happens to support your claim for autonomy of mind.

 

[untermensche]

I say over and over that the autonomous contemplative mind is generated by the reflexive brain.

And when the reflexive brain has dysfunction this can also cause dysfunction of the mind.

But when the brain is operating properly so is the autonomous contemplative mind.

You do say that. You do say these things. Repeating what you say and claim is not enough.

Your problem lies in not giving any explanations for how such autonomy is possible.....or the chance of ever providing a shred of evidence that happens to support your claim for autonomy of mind.

You haven't shown how it is impossible for some unknown "entity" created by unknown activity to have autonomy.