Free Will And Free Choice

[fromderinside]

The difference between what I wrote and what you wrote is you interjecting an attempt at justification for the notion 'mind'.

What I wrote stands without need for 'mind'.

What you wrote is how I think of what people who have to help think. So, you have no notion?

For your entertainment. https://academic.oup.com/cercorcomms/article/2/2/tgab038/6290105

Abstract

An event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging study examined how speakers inspect their own speech for errors. Concretely, we sought to assess 1) the role of the temporal cortex in monitoring speech errors, linked with comprehension-based monitoring; 2) the involvement of the cerebellum in internal and external monitoring, linked with forward modeling; and 3) the role of the medial frontal cortex for internal monitoring, linked with conflict-based monitoring. In a word production task priming speech errors, we observed enhanced involvement of the right posterior cerebellum for trials that were correct, but on which participants were more likely to make a word as compared with a nonword error (contrast of internal monitoring). Furthermore, comparing errors to correct utterances (contrast of external monitoring), we observed increased activation of the same cerebellar region, of the superior medial cerebellum, and of regions in temporal and medial frontal cortex. The presence of the cerebellum for both internal and external monitoring indicates the use of forward modeling across the planning and articulation of speech. Dissociations across internal and external monitoring in temporal and medial frontal cortex indicate that monitoring of overt errors is more reliant on vocal feedback control.

Think instead of treating speech errors through these processes that we use the processes for generating new instructions. Now there is strong reason for connecting auditory cortex with cerebellar wiring.

 

[untermensche]

Biofeedback is training the mind to control physiological functions.

If you think it is something else that is because you have no experience with it clinically.

Speech is complicated.

Speech is a crude attachment to the language capacity which was initially used only for thinking since no words had been created yet.

 

[DBT]

Biofeedback is training the mind to control physiological functions.

If you think it is something else that is because you have no experience with it clinically.

Speech is complicated.

Speech is a crude attachment to the language capacity which was initially used only for thinking since no words had been created yet.

Biofeedback is means and a body of information that alters the state and function of the system. There are more than a few ways to alter behaviour, some may entail therapy, professional intervention, drugs, etc, to helpt the subject overcome habits, addictions or making poor life decisions.

 

[DBT]

Well, that's where you go astray. Your assumption has no support....

You merely prove you are no philosopher.

Experience is evidence. It is more evidence than reading any study.

You reject the direct evidence of your experience.

You are no philosopher. Philosophers don't do that. They question experience. They don't say experience is not our primary evidence.

A philosopher understands that experience is the primary evidence we have and all other things, like studies which can be flawed and many times are, are secondary.

You can't make a judgement about truth that has any meaning unless you have the absolute freedom to make judgements about truth.

You have freely chosen to look at the methods of a study and how it was conducted and conclude it is absolutely providing valid data. You make so many of these kinds of decisions and have been making them for so long you are blind to your own will somehow.

You are not a philosopher of any kind so I know you will not be able to deal with this and I waste my time.

You prove that you have no idea. You prove that your mind is closed to science, which you summarily reject because it doesn't support your unfounded notion of autonomy of mind.

Meanwhile:
''Due to the intrinsic electrical properties and the connectivity of thalamic neurones two groups of corticothalamic loops are generated, which resonate at a frequency of 40 Hz. The specific thalamo-cortical loops give the content of cognition and the no specific loop, the temporal binding required for the unity of the cognitive experience. Consciousness is then, a product of the resonant thalamo-cortical activity, and the dialogue between the thalamus and cortex, the process that generates subjectivity, the unique experience we all recognized as the existence of the "self"

 

[untermensche]

''Due to the intrinsic electrical properties and the connectivity of thalamic neurones two groups of corticothalamic loops are generated, which resonate at a frequency of 40 Hz. The specific thalamo-cortical loops give the content of cognition and the no specific loop, the temporal binding required for the unity of the cognitive experience. Consciousness is then, a product of the resonant thalamo-cortical activity, and the dialogue between the thalamus and cortex, the process that generates subjectivity, the unique experience we all recognized as the existence of the "self"

That is absolute gibberish and you can't prove otherwise.

What he is talking about wouldn't generate a thing.

Go ahead. Try to make a consciousness from resonating electrical loops.

He is just arbitrarily looking at some electrical activity and inventing fictional stories about it.

Science?

What a joke!

It is shared delusion.

Like people who think Trump really won.

 

[untermensche]

Biofeedback is training the mind to control physiological functions.

If you think it is something else that is because you have no experience with it clinically.

Speech is complicated.

Speech is a crude attachment to the language capacity which was initially used only for thinking since no words had been created yet.

Biofeedback is means and a body of information that alters the state and function of the system. There are more than a few ways to alter behaviour, some may entail therapy, professional intervention, drugs, etc, to helpt the subject overcome habits, addictions or making poor life decisions.

Biofeedback does not alter behavior.

It alters physiological processes.

It is well established science.

And the way these processes are altered is by trying, by willing.

 

[fromderinside]

Biofeedback is training the mind to control physiological functions.

If you think it is something else that is because you have no experience with it clinically.

Speech is complicated.

Speech is a crude attachment to the language capacity which was initially used only for thinking since no words had been created yet.

When are you going to say something related to the existence of free will that isn't derivative or adhom.

 

[DBT]

Biofeedback is training the mind to control physiological functions.

If you think it is something else that is because you have no experience with it clinically.

Speech is complicated.

Speech is a crude attachment to the language capacity which was initially used only for thinking since no words had been created yet.

Biofeedback is means and a body of information that alters the state and function of the system. There are more than a few ways to alter behaviour, some may entail therapy, professional intervention, drugs, etc, to helpt the subject overcome habits, addictions or making poor life decisions.

Biofeedback does not alter behavior.

It alters physiological processes.

It is well established science.

And the way these processes are altered is by trying, by willing.

What do you think altering 'psychological processes' entails?

A hint, psychological processes don't exist in a vacuum.

And what do you think is the substrata of psychological processes?


Think about it.

 

[untermensche]

Biofeedback is training the mind to control physiological functions.

If you think it is something else that is because you have no experience with it clinically.

Speech is complicated.

Speech is a crude attachment to the language capacity which was initially used only for thinking since no words had been created yet.

When are you going to say something related to the existence of free will that isn't derivative or adhom.

What is imparting meaning and coherence into your strings of words?

Why are you writing them?

Are you being forced by some demon?

You simply want to discount every argument that makes the claim we don't have free will look absurd.

Your position is absurd.

You are saying you have truth.

You are therefore saying you have the capacity to decide if some ideas are true and some ideas are not.

You are merely a child that won't admit that is takes freedom to make those kinds of decisions.

The brain knows nothing about ideas. The brain is cells and neurotransmitters and synapses. It can't make decisions about ideas.

The mind knows about ideas. Nothing else.

The mind knows about colors. Nothing else.

 

[untermensche]

Biofeedback does not alter behavior.

It alters physiological processes.

It is well established science.

And the way these processes are altered is by trying, by willing.

What do you think altering 'psychological processes' entails?

A hint, psychological processes don't exist in a vacuum.

And what do you think is the substrata of psychological processes?


Think about it.

You think about it.

If I use my mind to lower the muscle tone of my erector spinae what have I done?

You do understand the entire criminal justice system works under the assumption that humans freely make choices?

I have the entire real world on my side.

You have people that claim guessing about the timing of invisible "urges" is science.

This is your position:

You start with: The brain creates the mind therefore the mind cannot influence the brain. (It doesn't follow but that doesn't stop you. You are free to make errors.)

And you end with: The brain creates the mind therefore the mind cannot influence the brain.

You have a prejudice. Not ideas.

All you can do is express your prejudice in one way or another.

You can't deal and haven't dealt with any ideas.

Perhaps you are not free like me?

 

[fromderinside]

I am a very advanced evolved being. My capabilities are built upon almost 4 billion years of evolution.

I'm pretty sure that what I am and do are pretty well written in that evolutionary process. Nowhere is there evidence of other than material existence. There are claims that either we were created or that we have evolved to a unique state where other than material presence is required and achieved. Such considerations as the above have been on going for at least 7000 years without once evidence of a discovery made suggesting such is possible or present.

The problem with such claims is that they originate from beings considering themselves. About five thousand years ago another methodology was discovered where material evidence was required to substantiate guesses about how things worked, including humans. Tumors were removed from persons in Egypt resulting in changes in human behavior.

Later, about 2000 years ago, machines were designed and built manipulating material and recording material changes which are today the foundations of the scientific method. The method is characterized by conducting experiments and observing material differences and patterns. The methodology required only that which was independently verified, replicated, and demonstrated by public observation of material changes in situations verified by material interventions.

No looking inside or using one self as the unverifiable instrument of study.

We are caught in contradiction when we look into ourselves. That is because the one looking is looking at himself then judging an effect he cannot share with others. They must look inside themselves and find the same thing which is not possible since there is no evidence independent of the to show the observations are materially the same.

I'm only sayin that I have data to support my position that others can generate by replicating my material intervention and measurement. You have not once demonstrated data achieved and and relocatable this way. You have no experimental program where one can take what you claim and verify it publicly by material test.

I'm only falsifying what you claim. I am saying I have a methodology through which to add to what others have done as well as falsify that of those who have left or missed something. In the case of your claims you have no evidence other than your self reports. So one cannot even set up an experiment to falsify/validate what you claim. That being the case your claims must await procedures that permit one to verify that brain causes mind or experiences or creates color. Given the pattern of such claims in the past I'm pretty confident you're claims will also end up in the dust bin of the imaginary.

 

[untermensche]

If you are not free it is all meaningless and nobody cares.

I am free. Nothing forces my opinions. They are freely made. Which means many will be wrong.

I can only relate to other beings that are free.

Beings that claim they are not free are of no interest to me.

They just say what they are forced to say with no thinking involved.

They are babbling zombies.

But how does an unfree entity talk?

What is forcing the speech?

It can't be the brain.

The brain does not understand language. Minds do.

No looking inside or using one self as the unverifiable instrument of study.

You are in a philosophy section?

So goodby to philosophy I guess. Goody to things like justice and truth. They only exist in the mind.

Introspection is verboten by the Nazi master.

Introspection is an activity of the mind.

Those that do it can learn to like it.

 

[untermensche]

I'm pretty sure that what I am and do are pretty well written in that evolutionary process.

What you are is what you experience yourself as being.

No science can ever change that or overrule your experience.

Experience is superior to science.

Experience is absolute fact.

Science is human approximations to fact.

 

[fromderinside]

No looking inside or using one self as the unverifiable instrument of study.

You are in a philosophy section?

So goodby to philosophy I guess. Goody to things like justice and truth. They only exist in the mind.

Introspection is verboten by the Nazi master.

Introspection is an activity of the mind.

Those that do it can learn to like it.

wow. Just because we come up with a better way of asking and answering questions everything else is Kaput?

I don't think so. We can frame old questions in new paradigms. All one need do is improve rhetorical with material and away we go.

 

[untermensche]

All science could possibly do is explain why I have experience.

It can't make my experience not my experience.

My experience is absolute fact as to my nature.

Science is a crude wooden lifeless approximation.

 

[fromderinside]

We already now why we feel the need to create a placeholder called experience. It increases the likelihood we will successfully reproduce.

Science does nothing. It is a methodology. Scientists use the method to find answers to material questions. What, how and why brain are topic areas. Rational generation of Experience is a poor man's explanation of how he sees his life flow. Since all existence is material, material methods will ultimately lead to material answers that work and can be replicated. We are well on our way.

Your method has reached its end which has been evident since the Renaissance. Laws, governments, practices will be better, more applicable, and tailorable when generated from knowledge of material human behavior. In fact the existence of the success of the use of the scientific method give testimony to it's fitness value. Your tired rational methodology has been running in circles for centuries. It is rightly being replaced by scientific methodology.

 

[DBT]

Biofeedback does not alter behavior.

It alters physiological processes.

It is well established science.

And the way these processes are altered is by trying, by willing.

What do you think altering 'psychological processes' entails?

A hint, psychological processes don't exist in a vacuum.

And what do you think is the substrata of psychological processes?


Think about it.

You think about it.

If I use my mind to lower the muscle tone of my erector spinae what have I done?

You do understand the entire criminal justice system works under the assumption that humans freely make choices?

I have the entire real world on my side.

You have people that claim guessing about the timing of invisible "urges" is science.

This is your position:

You start with: The brain creates the mind therefore the mind cannot influence the brain. (It doesn't follow but that doesn't stop you. You are free to make errors.)

And you end with: The brain creates the mind therefore the mind cannot influence the brain.

You have a prejudice. Not ideas.

All you can do is express your prejudice in one way or another.

You can't deal and haven't dealt with any ideas.

Perhaps you are not free like me?

Not even close: it is your brain that generates and uses mind as an evolved means to navigate and interact with the world. You are the work of your brain.

Meanwhile, the science;

Quote:
''A neurocognitive and socioecological model of self-awareness has been recently proposed (Morin, 2003; 2004a). The model takes into account most known mechanisms and processes leading to self-awareness, and examines their multiple and complex interactions. Inner speech is postulated to play a key-role in this model, as it establishes important connections between many of its elements.

This paper first reviews past and current mentions to a link between self-awareness and inner speech. It then presents an analysis of the nature of the relation between these two concepts.

It is suggested that inner speech can internally reproduce and expand social and physical (ecological) sources of self-awareness. Inner speech can also create a psychological distance between the self and mental events it experiences' thus facilitating self-ob servation; it can act as a problem-solving devise where the self represents the problem and self-information the solution, and can label aspects of one's inner life that would otherwise be difficult to objectively perceive. Empirical evidence supporting the role of inner speech in self-awareness is also presented.

As stipulated by the self-awareness model (Morin, 2003; 2004a), the social environment represents a rich source of self-information and can in different ways initiate self-focus. Two theorists explored this notion in detail: Charles Horton Cooley and George Herbert Mead. Cooley (1912) basically proposed that people regularly comment on (verbal feedback, e.g., you are intelligent), or react to (non-verbal feedback) our personal characteristics and behaviors. These reflected appraisals allow one to learn about oneself and can also induce self awareness.

One can also engage in sophisticated conversations with significant others and discuss one's personality characteristics and typical behavioral patterns. This feedback can also be non-verbal, people smile at, look angry at, or ignore one another; one uses this information to develop a self-view.''

 

[untermensche]

We already now why we feel the need to create a placeholder called experience.

Who is this "we"?

You mean "YOU"?

Experience is absolute truth.

The only absolute truth we have.

Tell me about something that is not an experience.

That is all you could possibly know about. It all your mind has access to.

 

[untermensche]

Not even close: it is your brain that generates and uses mind as an evolved means to navigate and interact with the world. You are the work of your brain.

So the brain wants to navigate so it doesn't just navigate it creates some thing that is aware of the world and thinks it is navigating?

Your position is laughably absurd!

You have no ability to think.

Perhaps you are just a robot without a will?

I have a free mind that laughs at your ridiculous claims you can't support in any way.



This is from your nonsense you call science because it confirms your prejudices:

It is suggested that inner speech can internally reproduce and expand social and physical (ecological) sources of self-awareness. Inner speech can also create a psychological distance between the self and mental events it experiences'

This is meaningless and pretty bad empty speculation based on nothing.

But they do know there is a "self".

Inner speech is an experience.

One of many many experiences.

But it is not thinking.

Thinking is using the will to direct inner speech.

It is not the random inner speech generated by the brain like it generates a dream.

And the brain has no clue what it is doing.

Only the mind understands the speech.

Those that claim the brain understands speech are religious nuts.

 

[DBT]

Not even close: it is your brain that generates and uses mind as an evolved means to navigate and interact with the world. You are the work of your brain.

So the brain wants to navigate so it doesn't just navigate it creates some thing that is aware of the world and thinks it is navigating?

Your position is laughably absurd!

You have no ability to think.

Perhaps you are just a robot without a will?

I have a free mind that laughs at your ridiculous claims you can't support in any way.



This is from your nonsense you call science because it confirms your prejudices:

It is suggested that inner speech can internally reproduce and expand social and physical (ecological) sources of self-awareness. Inner speech can also create a psychological distance between the self and mental events it experiences'

This is meaningless and pretty bad empty speculation based on nothing.

But they do know there is a "self".

Inner speech is an experience.

One of many many experiences.

But it is not thinking.

Thinking is using the will to direct inner speech.

It is not the random inner speech generated by the brain like it generates a dream.

And the brain has no clue what it is doing.

Only the mind understands the speech.

Those that claim the brain understands speech are religious nuts.

Brain agency is easily tested. Apply chemical changes, alcohol, drugs, electrical stimulation of brain regions, structural changes, etc, etc, and see what happens to consciousness, perception, emotions, decision making......

Your claims are absurd.

Meanwhile, the science;

Quote:

''A new study provides a novel theory for how delusions arise and why they persist. NYU Langone Medical Center researcher Orrin Devinsky, MD, performed an in-depth analysis of patients with certain delusions and brain disorders revealing a consistent pattern of injury to the frontal lobe and right hemisphere of the human brain. The cognitive deficits caused by these injuries to the right hemisphere, leads to the over compensation by the left hemisphere of the brain for the injury, resulting in delusions. The article entitled "Delusional misidentifications and duplications: Right brain lesions, left brain delusions" appears in the latest issue of the journal of Neurology.

''Problems caused by these brain injuries include impairment in monitoring of self, awareness of errors, and incorrectly identifying what is familiar and what is a work of fiction," said Dr. Devinsky, professor of Neurology, Psychiatry and Neurosurgery and Director of the NYU Epilepsy Center at NYU Langone Medical Center. "However, delusions result from the loss of these functions as well as the over activation of the left hemisphere and its language structures, that 'create a story', a story which cannot be edited and modified to account for reality. Delusions result from right hemisphere lesions, but it is the left hemisphere that is deluded."