• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

COLOUR

... according to which nerve fibers carried the electrical impulse, which photoreceptors were activated by the light

I put this first because you continue to spout no color information at all. Why should which nerve fibers and which photoreceptors mentioned at all if something was created out of whole cloth. Because nothing is created. The statement screams that the information processed is location, color, and change over time.

Does not match the stimulation? Do you mean for additive or subtractive combination since humans are capable of doing both. When a red car is placed under a low pressure sodium light it appears as blueish. Gee, I wonder why?

Instead of creates a picture, within capability bounds, a replication of external scene is produced. The nerves are already conditioned and in place in as many as nineteen areas of the cortex. So not only is the scene reproduced but the activity in the scene is reflected in the excitations.

Time/space sensitive processing, such as with the pipe passing through a window illusion, are much more likely to provide impossible scenes. Obviously nothing is created just misinterpreted by existing evolved structure processes.

Not to put too fine of a point on things but the article to which you refer is current right up to 1995 and is from a Chemistry experiment where they really aren't very careful with such as mood and meaning of actual behavior. IOW creates is laymen level use, not process validated at all.
 
You are claiming any information is color information.

Even information only about the transformation of a protein molecule in the eye. Even only the information that a switch has been turned on by a hand.

All the brain can possibly know is whether the shape of a protein changed. It can't know anything about the energy that caused it. It can't get any information about color from the energy that merely caused a protein to change shape. The energy has not transferred information. It has caused a reaction. That is not the same thing.

The brain can't possibly know what experience to make from a mere change of shape of a protein in a cell.

It makes something it evolved to make, something it randomly made one time in the past that evolved and eventually became the production of the visual experience, which granted a survival advantage along the way.

Does not match the stimulation? Do you mean for additive or subtractive combination since humans are capable of doing both. When a red car is placed under a low pressure sodium light it appears as blueish. Gee, I wonder why?

Yes clearly.

For us, the thing that experiences vision, the addition of green plus red will never make orange.

But for a brain something that only stimulates parts of the spectrum that produces the experience of red and green somehow produces orange.

Clearly that shows that the experience of orange is not connected to anything out in the world.

It is merely that which stimulates the brain a certain way.
 
Fortunately, the brain never knows anything. It is a biological machine used to process inputs and produce outputs. What's known are the arrangement of neurons, location and function of sense cells and the architecture of processes of a system designed to produce appropriate responses from the nervous system, etc. In other words the brain is a well designed information processing machine functionally tuned to what is processed, designed to provide appropriate responses to what is sensed and felt, at any instant in time.

Its all in there.

Your vitalized notions are funny and completely wrong.
 
The brain makes orange from the stimulation of so-called red and green receptors.

You are claiming the energy has orange information.

There is no such thing.
 
There is no such thing.

Ri-ight! Optical Filters – Color Temperature Orange (CTO) and Color Temperature Blue (CTB): https://abrisatechnologies.com/2012...re-orange-cto-and-color-temperature-blue-ctb/

If you experience orange it is because some red and green causing energy struck your eye and your brain created orange as an experience.

There is no such thing as orange causing energy. There is only red, blue and green causing energy. Only three receptors. No such thing as something in the world that has orange as a property.

There are only three color (colorless energy turned to the experience of color) receptors.

This is like explaining a spherical world to a flat Earther.

You can't mentally separate your experience from where you believe it originates.

You are experiencing in your mind. It is all there. Nothing you experience is in the world. Sound is not in the world. Vibrating air is.

All experience is a creation of the brain.
 
In the world of woo woo a being manifests a brain that is a part that creates, a mind within that part that creates, an experience that is created by one of the afore mentioned.

If that is the spherical world than I'm happily a flat earther who lives among those who have figured our that determination, not creation, makes the world go-round. There is no mud subjective world that creates. There is only a being that is evolved to work well enough to survive who uses the subjective as excuse for 'knowing'.
 
You can call it woo.

It is the product of evolution though.

All experience is a brain creation and the thing that experiences them is a brain creation.

If you don't understand that you will never explain anything.

You are not experiencing the table. You can't. You can measure it's size and mass. Those are features of the table.

You are experiencing a creation of the table such that a created mind can experience it.

Minds can experience color so a table that merely has reflective properties is experienced as having color. You can't stop yourself from experiencing the color. It is a reflex.

Some however can understand where color exists and where it does not. It does not exist carried by energy. Energy is a hand that turns on a switch.

Call that woo if you like. Call evolutionary products like the experience of color woo if you like.
 
You can call it woo.

It is the product of evolution though.

All experience is a brain creation and the thing that experiences them is a brain creation.

If you don't understand that you will never explain anything.

You are not experiencing the table. You can't. You can measure it's size and mass. Those are features of the table.

You are experiencing a creation of the table such that a created mind can experience it.

Minds can experience color so a table that merely has reflective properties is experienced as having color. You can't stop yourself from experiencing the color. It is a reflex.

Some however can understand where color exists and where it does not. It does not exist carried by energy. Energy is a hand that turns on a switch.

Call that woo if you like. Call evolutionary products like the experience of color woo if you like.


Three or four problems with your claims. Behavior comes from circulation, endocrine, muscular, gustatory, respiratory, and muscular information systems. Not all of those are located or controlled in the brain. In fact a substantial part of the nervous system and a substantial part of behavior is controlled, initiated, influenced outside the brain.

Now if you want to go all nineteenth century about creating you may have an audience. If you want to look at the sources of human creating behavior you might consider the mechanisms underlying endocrine and hormonal systems mostly governed by organs in the torso and abdominal regions and communicated with via vascular system. Remember the "I ran and I was afraid or I was afraid and I ran" issues back in the day. Or how about gate pain theory. Or you might look at chemical system changing moods and/or priorities.

No matter. Just be assured you don't have a clue about what is and how does experience operate. It is a subjective function. It differs between families/family members for crying out loud.

Finally the brain is not about tones of behavior it is primarily a machine that organizes inputs into behavioral choices for executive functions against current behavioral status and organize proper bodily responses including situational status and action options.

Even if you had a coherent thought, which you don't, you'd be up against it when you try to reconcile your definition of reflex with what the term (muscular) reflex is designed to represent.
 
Three or four problems with your claims. Behavior comes from circulation, endocrine, muscular, gustatory, respiratory, and muscular information systems. Not all of those are located or controlled in the brain. In fact a substantial part of the nervous system and a substantial part of behavior is controlled, initiated, influenced outside the brain.

Behavior?

A reflex is behavior but it is controlled by inner "programming".

There is no thinking or what we would call "willing" involved.

Now if you want to go all nineteenth century about creating you may have an audience.

You can't have an arm without the creative power of evolutionary change.

The arm is a creation.

Just like the ability of a brain to create the experience of color is an evolutionary creation.

If you want to look at the sources of human creating behavior you might consider the mechanisms underlying endocrine and hormonal systems mostly governed by organs in the torso and abdominal regions and communicated with via vascular system.

A hormone like testosterone can effect behavior. But not the visual reflex.

A hormone like thyroid hormone can effect energy level and growth and temperature. But not the visual reflex.

Epinephrine and Norepinephrine directly effect the nervous system. The sympathetic and parasympathetic systems.

Dopamine and serotonin work in the brain and in the enteric nervous system.

But the visual reflex is not effected by those nervous systems.

Remember the "I ran and I was afraid or I was afraid and I ran" issues back in the day.

There are two kinds of grammar.

Natural grammar that allows even people who never went to school to talk and understand and generally use proper grammar but some there are usually mistakes in what an "educated" mind would call "proper grammar".

And there is man-made grammar. A bunch of useless rules that are arbitrary and not needed for communication but can distinguish a person as having a certain education and indoctrination.

Or how about gate pain theory.

All physical therapists are very familiar with this theory. It is the theory behind the application of 'TENS', an electrical modality applied to the skin, for chronic pain.

Some kind of gate theory might apply to the visual reflex. The application of energy in the entire spectrum wipes away the individual color experiences and white is experienced instead.

Or you might look at chemical system changing moods and/or priorities.

Without a doubt chemicals change moods. Testosterone is a classic example. When administered at certain levels people become aggressive with higher levels of anger.

They are in a sympathetic fight mode all the time. This helps with weight training and sports.

You need to keep the sympathetic system in check though. The young child that rolls on the floor and cries in anger when frustrated. They have not learned yet to keep the sympathetic system in check. This is hopefully learned before puberty where the hormones make it more difficult. But even childhood learning can be overpowered by unusually high circulating levels.

No matter. Just be assured you don't have a clue about what is and how does experience operate.

I know beyond any doubt that energy cannot pass on information to an evolving brain about what to make from the stimulation from that energy.

Abilities are gained though evolution and random changes of the brain. Not because of information passed from the environment.

There is no mechanism for EM energy to tell a brain to make orange when a bit of the 'red' and a bit of the 'green cells' are stimulated.

Finally the brain is not about tones of behavior it is primarily a machine that organizes inputs into behavioral choices for executive functions against current behavioral status and organize proper bodily responses including situational status and action options.

Memory is all about the storage of information.

The visual reflex is not about memory however. It is about immediate stimulation. If something is experienced it can become part of memory however.

Saying the brain does not have the room to contain the information necessary to create orange is preposterous.

That's like saying the spinal cord does not have enough room to contain the patellar reflex.
 
Human behavior, all of it is determined, responsive, conditional !!!

You want to call an experience a reflex. Fine. It's not. It subjective description.

In terms of vision a person can try to better focus their eye or even try to put the eye out of focus.

A person can attend strongly or attend to other things, thoughts, while the eye is pointed at a object with invisible energy moving around.

A person can close their eyes and stop the energy from hitting them.

But you can't stop the visual reflex with an intact brain with eyes that were exposed to invisible colorless energy at critical periods of development.

If your comments are determined you have no way to know if they are rational.

You confuse the fact that some behavior can be controlled by hormones with all behavior is controlled by hormones.

There is no hormonal component involved when a person makes the mental calculation that some idea is rational.

Irrational behavior is under hormonal control. Rage, fits of anger, depression.

Rational behavior is something humans learn in their minds with exposure and hold in memory.

Rational behavior is controlled by first gaining an understanding of rational behavior and maintained by the faithfulness of memory.

The hormones are not involved.
 
What the hell do you ean and how do you support
If your comments are determined you have no way to know if they are rational.

That is just so many words presented in a string meaning nothing. What is spoken is determined. The words are not. Neither have anything to do with whether the comments are rational which is a weak, more or less meaningless, alternative to empiricism.
 
If you have no control over your thoughts you have no way to make them rational.

No way to hone them into a rational idea.

No way to reject ideas based on their irrationality.

The brain does not have reason. A human is not born rational.

It must be learned by a mind that can act on thoughts.

I believe you.

You have not constructed your ideas with reason.

You have accepted the bad ideas of others whole without any questioning.
 
Sorry untermensche. The cows have come home. Time to go. Bye.

It is OK.

I am used to you running away when reasoning is necessary.

All you know is how to repeat dubious claims of others.

And no way to know they are dubious because you have no intellectual freedom.

Your position is laughably asinine when compared to your behavior.
 
I only discuss things with beings in control of their ideas and capable of changing them based on reason alone.
 
Back
Top Bottom