Consciousness

[untermensche]

What you have to do is explain what a thought is physically to show me wrong.

Saying it is brain activity, or activity in the brain is not an answer unless you can correlate a specific thought to specific activity and show how the activity produced the effect to prove it is the activity producing the effect.

....thought is just information yielded by a brain processing inputs and processes according to it's genetically proven mechanics...

You completely ignore that a thought is something experienced.

You cannot explain "something experienced" with any model.

That is why you pretend it does not exist.

 

[DBT]

....thought is just information yielded by a brain processing inputs and processes according to it's genetically proven mechanics...

You completely ignore that a thought is something experienced.

You cannot explain "something experienced" with any model.

That is why you pretend it does not exist.

Not true.....yet you yourself claim to know that consciousness is able to decide independently of the brain, autonomous consciousness, when it is clearly the brain that is shaping and forming the experience of self and the world based on an interaction of architecture, information acquired and stored as memory.....yet you cannot see the absurdity of your own position. That is sad.

 

[DBT]

So you still avoid the physics of cognition....it is not 'your' thought that magically moves 'your' arm, but the system as a whole beginning - you guessed it - with the sequence of events, starting with inputs, processing and prompts and ending with the related motor action.....which is not carried out with/by thought but neural mechanisms in response to information inputs, processing, etc, etc.

Your idea has no evidential support, is not logical and has no merit. Yet you maintain it in the face of evidence to the contrary for your own personal reasons.

It is something done in the mind, call it a thought, call it the will, it doesn't matter. Nobody has the slightest idea what it is physically.

But if this "thought" is not carried out the arm will not move.

There is no evidence it is not this "thought" initiating action. Not one shred of evidence. Not even the timing of guesses.

Mind is something being formed by the brain...which you persistently overlook in favour of your own interpretation of autonomy of mind/consciousness, an interpretation that is clearly flawed.

 

[untermensche]

You completely ignore that a thought is something experienced.

You cannot explain "something experienced" with any model.

That is why you pretend it does not exist.

Not true.....

Now you are claiming thoughts are not something experienced?

Oh well. It is no more stupid than everything else you claim to know.

 

[DBT]

Not true.....

Now you are claiming thoughts are not something experienced?

Oh well. It is no more stupid than everything else you claim to know.

The ''not true'' was in response to your claim - ''That is why you pretend it does not exist'' - which is not true because nobody has made the claim that consciousness is not experienced. Consciousness being a composition of features and attributes such as thoughts, feelings, perceptions, etc, is an experience.

As usual, having no rational arguments, you construct a strawman to argue against in the vain hope that nobody will notice.

 

[untermensche]

Now you are claiming thoughts are not something experienced?

Oh well. It is no more stupid than everything else you claim to know.

The ''not true'' was in response to your claim - ''That is why you pretend it does not exist'' - which is not true because nobody has made the claim that consciousness is not experienced. Consciousness being a composition of features and attributes such as thoughts, feelings, perceptions, etc, is an experience.

As usual, having no rational arguments, you construct a strawman to argue against in the vain hope that nobody will notice.

Show me your model of how brain activity results in conscious experience.

 

[DBT]

The ''not true'' was in response to your claim - ''That is why you pretend it does not exist'' - which is not true because nobody has made the claim that consciousness is not experienced. Consciousness being a composition of features and attributes such as thoughts, feelings, perceptions, etc, is an experience.

As usual, having no rational arguments, you construct a strawman to argue against in the vain hope that nobody will notice.

Show me your model of how brain activity results in conscious experience.

Show me your model of how consciousness achieves autonomy from the brain (being the source of consciousness) and its electrochemical activity....which I think you have agreed forms and generates conscious activity, so is not the issue here.

Your claim of autonomy of consciousness being the issue, the point of contention, in case you may have forgotten.

Plus your 'brain as a receiver of disembodied consciousness' - which you have not pursued, so perhaps dropped (but I wouldn't bet on it)

 

[fromderinside]

Now you are claiming thoughts are not something experienced?

No. Thoughts are the information produced. The brain then interprets the thought as an experience, else nothing would come of it because the brain wouldn't be doing the work to express the interpretation of the thought like causing the arm to move.

 

[untermensche]

Show me your model of how brain activity results in conscious experience.

Show me your model of how consciousness achieves autonomy from the brain (being the source of consciousness) and its electrochemical activity....which I think you have agreed forms and generates conscious activity, so is not the issue here.

Your claim of autonomy of consciousness being the issue, the point of contention, in case you may have forgotten.

Plus your 'brain as a receiver of disembodied consciousness' - which you have not pursued, so perhaps dropped (but I wouldn't bet on it)

As I have said a thousand times.

You have no fucking model of how brain activity results in "experience".

You can't explain experience in any way.

You can't explain consciousness in any way.

 

[untermensche]

Now you are claiming thoughts are not something experienced?

No. Thoughts are the information produced. The brain then interprets the thought as an experience, else nothing would come of it because the brain wouldn't be doing the work to express the interpretation of the thought like causing the arm to move.

You know what thoughts are because you experience them.

You can make comments about your experience of them only.

You know absolutely nothing about how the brain generates them or what they can do to the brain.

 

[DBT]

Show me your model of how consciousness achieves autonomy from the brain (being the source of consciousness) and its electrochemical activity....which I think you have agreed forms and generates conscious activity, so is not the issue here.

Your claim of autonomy of consciousness being the issue, the point of contention, in case you may have forgotten.

Plus your 'brain as a receiver of disembodied consciousness' - which you have not pursued, so perhaps dropped (but I wouldn't bet on it)

As I have said a thousand times.

You have no fucking model of how brain activity results in "experience".

You can't explain experience in any way.

You can't explain consciousness in any way.

You still argue against a Strawman of your own making because nobody has claimed to know how the brain forms conscious experience, only that it's abundantly clear that it does on the basis of information acquired via the senses, information stored as memory (past experience) neural architecture (different brains, different abilities, dogs, cats, mice, etc) that it does.....which I have pointed out a thousand times and was ignored a thousand times.....yet you yourself claim to know that consciousness is autonomous but cannot justify your claim.

There lies the irony of your untenable position. And the reason for your regular dummy spits and mantras used as a smokescreen.

 

[untermensche]

As I have said a thousand times.

You have no fucking model of how brain activity results in "experience".

You can't explain experience in any way.

You can't explain consciousness in any way.

You still argue against a Strawman of your own making because nobody has claimed to know how the brain forms conscious experience, only that it's abundantly clear that it does on the basis of information acquired via the senses, information stored as memory (past experience) neural architecture (different brains, different abilities, dogs, cats, mice, etc) that it does.....which I have pointed out a thousand times and was ignored a thousand times.....yet you yourself claim to know that consciousness is autonomous but cannot justify your claim.

There lies the irony of your untenable position. And the reason for your regular dummy spits and mantras used as a smokescreen.

It is no strawman.

It is the essential issue. It is the thing that needs to be explained to claim you understand consciousness and what a thought is capable of doing.

From brain activity to conscious experience. Every step of the way. And not a correlation. An explanation of how it happens. Not some empty story about what you think is happening based only on your own experience and no understanding of anything else.

Right now this is a huge gaping chasm of the unknown.

Only some don't quite understand that.

 

[fromderinside]

You know absolutely nothing about how the brain generates them or what they can do to the brain.

The brain is a machine. It produces information. Do you deny that?

 

[untermensche]

You know absolutely nothing about how the brain generates them or what they can do to the brain.

The brain is a machine. It produces information. Do you deny that?

The brain is the slave of consciousness. It lives to serve consciousness.

Not the other way around.

The brain desperately tries to make sense of the external world FOR consciousness.

The brain creates vision and hearing FOR consciousness.

The brain moves the arm when consciousness demands.

 

[fromderinside]

Yeah, right. The brain was designed for consciousness. I get it. All all hail to the great designer.

Please, make your argument without need for words like desperately, creates, demands. You have no basis when using such terms. Might as well go to the Adirondacks forge a few documents and start another religion. Sheesh.

 

[untermensche]

Yeah, right. The brain was designed for consciousness. I get it....

Of course.

If the brain wasn't designed for it it wouldn't exist.

 

[DBT]

You still argue against a Strawman of your own making because nobody has claimed to know how the brain forms conscious experience, only that it's abundantly clear that it does on the basis of information acquired via the senses, information stored as memory (past experience) neural architecture (different brains, different abilities, dogs, cats, mice, etc) that it does.....which I have pointed out a thousand times and was ignored a thousand times.....yet you yourself claim to know that consciousness is autonomous but cannot justify your claim.

There lies the irony of your untenable position. And the reason for your regular dummy spits and mantras used as a smokescreen.

It is no strawman.

Of course it is, its a Strawman, for the reasons I've already pointed out....you take something that nobody has even claimed and argue against it repeatedly. Sometimes in the very next post. It's like nothing can get through to you. You have your own beliefs, beliefs that are not supported by research, evidence or the researchers themselves which you reject out of hand while maintaining your own claims, claims that have no evidence (ignoring the means and mechanisms of movement) and cannot justify, only assert.

Right now this is a huge gaping chasm of the unknown.

Only some don't quite understand that.

Which is you, because it is you who is making a positive claim of autonomy of consciousness even while maintaining ''this is a huge gaping chasm of the unknown''

And still arguing against a strawman of your own making because nobody is claiming to know how the brain forms consciousness, only that it is clear that it does. Which means that something is understood about brain function, the role of the senses, processing centres, memory function, etc, even if we don't know how experience is formed.

You on the other hand claim nothing is known about consciousness/ I know consciousness is autonomous while ignoring the known role of the senses, processing, memory function, etc, in conscious experience, sight, sound, thoughts, etc, all being brain functions with no autonomy from the senses or the brain function as a whole.

You have no case to argue.

 

[fromderinside]

Yeah, right. The brain was designed for consciousness. I get it....

Of course.

If the brain wasn't designed for it it wouldn't exist.

RU saying some agent designed the brain? What would that be?

 

[untermensche]

Of course.

If the brain wasn't designed for it it wouldn't exist.

RU saying some agent designed the brain? What would that be?

Of course. One is necessary for function to exist.

The agent is natural selection.

 

[untermensche]

It is no strawman.

Of course it is, its a Strawman, for the reasons I've already pointed out....you take something that nobody has even claimed and argue against it repeatedly. Sometimes in the very next post. It's like nothing can get through to you. You have your own beliefs, beliefs that are not supported by research, evidence or the researchers themselves which you reject out of hand while maintaining your own claims, claims that have no evidence (ignoring the means and mechanisms of movement) and cannot justify, only assert.

Right now this is a huge gaping chasm of the unknown.

Only some don't quite understand that.

Which is you, because it is you who is making a positive claim of autonomy of consciousness even while maintaining ''this is a huge gaping chasm of the unknown''

And still arguing against a strawman of your own making because nobody is claiming to know how the brain forms consciousness, only that it is clear that it does. Which means that something is understood about brain function, the role of the senses, processing centres, memory function, etc, even if we don't know how experience is formed.

You on the other hand claim nothing is known about consciousness/ I know consciousness is autonomous while ignoring the known role of the senses, processing, memory function, etc, in conscious experience, sight, sound, thoughts, etc, all being brain functions with no autonomy from the senses or the brain function as a whole.

You have no case to argue.

Nothing is forcing me to reply.

Nothing forced you to say what you said.

The words only exist because an autonomous consciousness wanted them to.

That is what consciousness was designed to be.

An autonomous decision maker.