Consciousness

[untermensche]

What exactly do you think you know about "mind" that the whole world does not?

Again.

Either some god "programmed" the universe to come up with the Theory of Relativity. The position of the religious faithful.

Or some human did it freely with their "mind".

The position of the rational.

I said mind, minds, and the mind have no set definition and you illustrate that by qualifying mind with quotes
So I don't know what you are talking about because nether do you

You are not engaging with any ideas.

Ideas are rattling about you and you have no ability to discuss them.

Again.

Either the universe was programmed by some god to come up with the Theory of Relativity. The position of a few religious nuts.

Or some human freely used their "mind" to take existing knowledge a little further.

Which is what most people believe.

 

[none]

I said mind, minds, and the mind have no set definition and you illustrate that by qualifying mind with quotes
So I don't know what you are talking about because nether do you

You are not engaging with any ideas.

Ideas are rattling about you and you have no ability to discuss them.

Again.

Either the universe was programmed by some god to come up with the Theory of Relativity. The position of a few religious nuts.

Or some human freely used their "mind" to take existing knowledge a little further.

Which is what most people believe.

Yes i understand you qualify mind with quotes, not literal great
So your not literal interpretation is not literal, I guess we are done here

 

[untermensche]

You are not engaging with any ideas.

Ideas are rattling about you and you have no ability to discuss them.

Again.

Either the universe was programmed by some god to come up with the Theory of Relativity. The position of a few religious nuts.

Or some human freely used their "mind" to take existing knowledge a little further.

Which is what most people believe.

Yes i understand you qualify mind with quotes, not literal great
So your not literal interpretation is not literal, I guess we are done here

Yes it takes two people capable of engaging to have an exchange.

You clearly have nothing to add.

Beyond the absurd claim that the universe has been programmed to cause some human "mind" to come up with the Theory of Relativity.

Run away if you must.

Before you get hurt.

 

[none]

Yes i understand you qualify mind with quotes, not literal great
So your not literal interpretation is not literal, I guess we are done here

Yes it takes two people capable of engaging to have an exchange.

You clearly have nothing to add.

Beyond the absurd claim that the universe has been programmed to cause some human "mind" to come up with the Theory of Relativity.

Run away if you must.

Before you get hurt.

You are using the same methodology as people who believe in souls controlling human behavior
There isn't much to contemplate here, your responses are vacuous
If you weren't so empty with your responses I would say this discussion is a great benefit to me, but it's not and not because you have presented anything valid about human or otherwise brain endowed individuals
You might as well say the devil made me do it

 

[Copernicus]

Untermensche, can you provide us with a description of what you think "consciousness" is? Is it just awareness of one's self and one's surroundings, or does it include volition? Is it possible that all of our actions are taken independently of conscious awareness and that we only become aware of them in afterthought? After all, we are not usually conscious of taking breaths, but we can make ourselves conscious of that activity and even hold our breath. What I am concerned with here is that it may not be a good idea to conflate consciousness with volition. When you catch a ball that is tossed to you, you aren't necessarily conscious of all the decisions involved in coordinating muscular behavior that allows you to successfully catch it.

 

[DBT]

It is the developing brain that learns to walk, talk, recognize, move limbs, pick up objects, etc, and a part of that ability and process of learning and adapting to changing circumstances involves consciously representing the external world and self as a feedback mechanism, to adjust, to adapt, to respond. Consciousness plays an indispensable role that enables complex interactions, but the ultimate agency is still the brain. That is what you need to understand.

The developing child learns how to control their limbs with their "will". That's why you can move your arm at "will".

When a child has CP and they have trouble controlling their limbs a therapist uses the "will" of the child to help it gain better control. Nothing else is available.

And the "will" can make changes to the brain.

We know this. It is undeniable.

A child is composed of many attributes and features. It is specifically the brain of a child that gathers information and learns. Not the feet of a child or the toe nails of a child or fingers and hands or the torso or any combination of the body parts of a child, but the brain. The brain is the seat of learning.

 

[untermensche]

Untermensche, can you provide us with a description of what you think "consciousness" is? Is it just awareness of one's self and one's surroundings, or does it include volition? Is it possible that all of our actions are taken independently of conscious awareness and that we only become aware of them in afterthought? After all, we are not usually conscious of taking breaths, but we can make ourselves conscious of that activity and even hold our breath. What I am concerned with here is that it may not be a good idea to conflate consciousness with volition. When you catch a ball that is tossed to you, you aren't necessarily conscious of all the decisions involved in coordinating muscular behavior that allows you to successfully catch it.

It is the ability to be conscious of visual representations, conscious of emotions and sensations and thoughts.

And it is the ability to move the arm at "will".

Being able to move the arm at will does not mean there is no reflexive motion. A loud noise may cause the head to reflexively turn towards it. This does not mean the head can't also be turned at "will".

And the ability to move at "will" is the ability to give general commands, the ability to initiate planned movements and stop movements.

Everybody knows they can move their arm at "will". This is not news to anybody.

 

[untermensche]

The developing child learns how to control their limbs with their "will". That's why you can move your arm at "will".

When a child has CP and they have trouble controlling their limbs a therapist uses the "will" of the child to help it gain better control. Nothing else is available.

And the "will" can make changes to the brain.

We know this. It is undeniable.

A child is composed of many attributes and features. It is specifically the brain of a child that gathers information and learns. Not the feet of a child or the toe nails of a child or fingers and hands or the torso or any combination of the body parts of a child, but the brain. The brain is the seat of learning.

Consciousness is the "part" of the brain that learns how to control the body. That "part" of the brain that learns how to move the arm at "will".

And once it learns how to do it, consciousness moves the limbs at "will" an entire lifetime.

To deny it is to deny experience. To live in a fantasy world.

 

[DBT]

A child is composed of many attributes and features. It is specifically the brain of a child that gathers information and learns. Not the feet of a child or the toe nails of a child or fingers and hands or the torso or any combination of the body parts of a child, but the brain. The brain is the seat of learning.

Consciousness is the "part" of the brain that learns how to control the body. That "part" of the brain that learns how to move the arm at "will".

And once it learns how to do it, consciousness moves the limbs at "will" an entire lifetime.

To deny it is to deny experience. To live in a fantasy world.

Nope, still wrong, still ignoring all evidence that shows you to be wrong...that consciousness can be separated from motor action. A subject may believe he has moved his arm when no movement has occurred. A subject may have moved his arm but deny that he has moved, not being aware of the movement because consciousness happens to be disassociated from motor function, different regions of the brain, functionality, yada, yada. Which you obviously cannot accept because you want to believe what you believe for whatever reason you want to believe it, as wrong as it is. And it is very, very wrong.

 

[untermensche]

Consciousness is the "part" of the brain that learns how to control the body. That "part" of the brain that learns how to move the arm at "will".

And once it learns how to do it, consciousness moves the limbs at "will" an entire lifetime.

To deny it is to deny experience. To live in a fantasy world.

Nope, still wrong, still ignoring all evidence that shows you to be wrong...consciousness can be separated from motor action. A subject may believe he has moved his arm when no movement has occurred. A subject may have moved his arm but deny that he has, not being aware of the movement because consciousness happens to be disassociated from motor function, different regions of the brain, functionality, yada, yada. Which you obviously cannot accept because you want to believe what you believe for whatever reason you want to believe it, as wrong as it is. And it is very, very wrong.

The fact that consciousness can be tricked does not mean it can't move the arm at "will". It does not mean consciousness is continually tricked.

You have great difficulty with rational thought.

 

[DBT]

Nope, still wrong, still ignoring all evidence that shows you to be wrong...consciousness can be separated from motor action. A subject may believe he has moved his arm when no movement has occurred. A subject may have moved his arm but deny that he has, not being aware of the movement because consciousness happens to be disassociated from motor function, different regions of the brain, functionality, yada, yada. Which you obviously cannot accept because you want to believe what you believe for whatever reason you want to believe it, as wrong as it is. And it is very, very wrong.

The fact that consciousness can be tricked does not mean it can't move the arm at "will". It does not mean consciousness is continually tricked.

You have great difficulty with rational thought.

Consciousness is not being ''tricked'' - which is a rationale that shows your abysmal grasp on the subject matter.

 

[untermensche]

The fact that consciousness can be tricked does not mean it can't move the arm at "will". It does not mean consciousness is continually tricked.

You have great difficulty with rational thought.

Consciousness is not being ''tricked'' - which is a rationale that shows your abysmal grasp on the subject matter.

Of course it is.

You not only can't think rationally you deny the obvious implications of your claims.

You are claiming that since consciousness can be mistaken (because of some trick, an artificial electrical stimulation right in the middle of a bunch of cells) it is always mistaken.

It is the worthless kind of reasoning you find all over this subject matter.

 

[George S]

https://youtu.be/mMJQVxkBCBA

 

[Copernicus]

Untermensche, can you provide us with a description of what you think "consciousness" is? Is it just awareness of one's self and one's surroundings, or does it include volition? Is it possible that all of our actions are taken independently of conscious awareness and that we only become aware of them in afterthought? After all, we are not usually conscious of taking breaths, but we can make ourselves conscious of that activity and even hold our breath. What I am concerned with here is that it may not be a good idea to conflate consciousness with volition. When you catch a ball that is tossed to you, you aren't necessarily conscious of all the decisions involved in coordinating muscular behavior that allows you to successfully catch it.

It is the ability to be conscious of visual representations, conscious of emotions and sensations and thoughts.

And it is the ability to move the arm at "will".

Being able to move the arm at will does not mean there is no reflexive motion. A loud noise may cause the head to reflexively turn towards it. This does not mean the head can't also be turned at "will".

And the ability to move at "will" is the ability to give general commands, the ability to initiate planned movements and stop movements.

Everybody knows they can move their arm at "will". This is not news to anybody.

I think I understand what you are trying to say, but I still think that it is a mistake to conflate the focus of attention with general awareness or volition. Most of our willful behavior is behavior under our control that we don't necessarily focus attention on. For example, you can walk while chewing gum and being engaged in a conversation. That doesn't mean your attention stays focused on any one of those activities in a given moment, but you are doing all three "at will". So the brain can monitor all sorts of bodily sensations with varying levels of awareness. It can also carry out willful activities without paying full attention to those activities. And that is the point that I would like to get across--that there is no clear on/off state when it comes to consciousness but varying levels and degrees of consciousness.

It is fair to say that scientists don't really understand how the mind works to produce the phenomenon we call consciousness. We can't yet build machines that think like us and, public perception to the contrary, we aren't anywhere near solving the problem of true artificial intelligence. However, neuroscientists can correlate just about any type of mental activity with brain activity. You don't seem to dispute that, so it is wrong to say that they don't know anything at all about consciousness. They know that brain activity produces it. It seems fairly obvious that we are "meat robots" in the sense that there is no need to attribute conscious or unconscious thought to anything but that brain activity. Do you agree with that point?

 

[ryan]

Consciousness is not being ''tricked'' - which is a rationale that shows your abysmal grasp on the subject matter.

Of course it is.

You not only can't think rationally you deny the obvious implications of your claims.

You are claiming that since consciousness can be mistaken (because of some trick, an artificial electrical stimulation right in the middle of a bunch of cells) it is always mistaken.

It is the worthless kind of reasoning you find all over this subject matter.

Untermensche, could you accept that for absolutely every unique mental state there is a unique physical function (functionalism)?

If your reply to the question is yes, then let's assume that the mental state of the feeling of will is some physical function. So isn't will just another correlation to a physical function that may be determined physically?

 

[untermensche]

I think I understand what you are trying to say, but I still think that it is a mistake to conflate the focus of attention with general awareness or volition.

It follows logically.

If the brain is going to devote all this energy creating representations for consciousness to experience it makes sense that consciousness can act on those representations. Otherwise it is hard to think of any reason to make them. Why not just act without all this unnecessary expenditure of energy?

Most of our willful behavior is behavior under our control that we don't necessarily focus attention on. For example, you can walk while chewing gum and being engaged in a conversation. That doesn't mean your attention stays focused on any one of those activities in a given moment, but you are doing all three "at will".

All that demonstrates is that if an activity is practiced sufficiently it takes very little focus to control it.

We do not have to think much about walking because we have had so much practice controlling it.

The same is true of chewing and talking.

But none of this demonstrates we cannot control our arm at "will".

So the brain can monitor all sorts of bodily sensations with varying levels of awareness. It can also carry out willful activities without paying full attention to those activities. And that is the point that I would like to get across--that there is no clear on/off state when it comes to consciousness but varying levels and degrees of consciousness.

I do not disagree with this.

But if a person just learns how to juggle they still need to concentrate very hard to juggle. And if they juggle every day for a year they eventually will not have to concentrate very hard at all.

Our ability to control our body improves with practice.

However, neuroscientists can correlate just about any type of mental activity with brain activity...

No they can't. They can only correlate it to location.

The activity itself is not understood at all.

 

[untermensche]

Of course it is.

You not only can't think rationally you deny the obvious implications of your claims.

You are claiming that since consciousness can be mistaken (because of some trick, an artificial electrical stimulation right in the middle of a bunch of cells) it is always mistaken.

It is the worthless kind of reasoning you find all over this subject matter.

Untermensche, could you accept that for absolutely every unique mental state there is a unique physical function (functionalism)?

If your reply to the question is yes, then the mental state of the feeling of will is some physical function. So isn't will just another correlation to a physical function that may be determined physically?

When we are talking about consciousness, subjective experience, we never really know. It is a unique phenomena with no objective understanding.

But suppose consciousness is the end result of some computational process.

Does the process know what the end result is experiencing?

Is the brain itself even aware of the things consciousness is aware of?

As far as will, what we are talking about is energy.

Does the "will" somehow have access to energy? Is the "will" a form of energy?

 

[ryan]

Untermensche, could you accept that for absolutely every unique mental state there is a unique physical function (functionalism)?

If your reply to the question is yes, then the mental state of the feeling of will is some physical function. So isn't will just another correlation to a physical function that may be determined physically?

When we are talking about consciousness, subjective experience, we never really know. It is a unique phenomena with no objective understanding.

But suppose consciousness is the end result of some computational process.

Does the process know what the end result is experiencing?

Is the brain itself even aware of the things consciousness is aware of?

As far as will, what we are talking about is energy.

Does the "will" somehow have access to energy? Is the "will" a form of energy?

Your last question here is what I am talking about. If will is energy, then it is constrained to the physical behavior of energy.

But let's just assume that energy is a correlate to mental states. Then we are still limited to what the energy does.

But compatibilism in such a clever way would still allow free will. When you feel like you are in control and your control is successful, then you at least have the satisfaction that your body went the way of your feeling of free will. At least we still have that.

 

[untermensche]

Your last question here is what I am talking about. If will is energy, then it is constrained to the physical behavior of energy.

But let's just assume that energy is a correlate to mental states. Then we are still limited to what the energy does.

The energy has to ultimately have an effect on cellular activity.

But presently there are many more questions than answers.

What the "will" is and how it is used are not understood in the least.

But compatibilism in such a clever way would still allow free will. When you feel like you are in control and your control is successful, then you at least have the satisfaction that your body went the way of your feeling of free will. At least we still have that.

It is not merely a "feeling" of control.

It is absolute knowledge.

I "will" the hand to move and it does. Every time.

 

[OLDMAN]

The energy has to ultimately have an effect on cellular activity.

But presently there are many more questions than answers.

What the "will" is and how it is used are not understood in the least.

But compatibilism in such a clever way would still allow free will. When you feel like you are in control and your control is successful, then you at least have the satisfaction that your body went the way of your feeling of free will. At least we still have that.

It is not merely a "feeling" of control.

It is absolute knowledge.

I "will" the hand to move and it does. Every time.

Tell us which part of the brain "you" access to control which neurons, and fire which muscle motors...since "you" are obviously in control with your "will?