Consciousness

[DBT]

A certain type of brain activity is the activity that activates conscious experience.....which can be manipulated, modified, induced to produce feeling and thoughts through electrical stimulation of brain regions or switched off on demand.

Yes, I think I have made it clear over the past few years that I agree that the brain generates consciousness. The consciousness is something that is generated from brain processes.

In the 1980’s, several teams at different universities developed tools to record and stimulate different parts of the brain. For example, Apostolos Georgopoulos at Johns Hopkins University inserted single electrodes into different parts of the motor region of a macaque monkey’s brain, recording how various neurons responded to different directions its arm moved. In the intervening decades, scientists have advanced and refined this ability, allowing them unprecedented control over certain manipulatable areas of the brain.

So where does that leave you with your ideas of panpsychism?

 

[ryan]

Yes, I think I have made it clear over the past few years that I agree that the brain generates consciousness. The consciousness is something that is generated from brain processes.

In the 1980’s, several teams at different universities developed tools to record and stimulate different parts of the brain. For example, Apostolos Georgopoulos at Johns Hopkins University inserted single electrodes into different parts of the motor region of a macaque monkey’s brain, recording how various neurons responded to different directions its arm moved. In the intervening decades, scientists have advanced and refined this ability, allowing them unprecedented control over certain manipulatable areas of the brain.

So where does that leave you with your ideas of panpsychism?

Panpsychism explains the origin of the consciousness in terms of its existence with one or more fundamental particles. The unification problem would remain a mystery (Except that entanglement seems to be the most obvious solution).

 

[Juma]

yes. But thiose "mental thoughts about epiphenomenalism" isnt based on observation.
Since if it where they cannot have caused them...

Do you really not understand this?

 

[untermensche]

That's not how it works sweet pea.

When all else fails and you have no argument, get cute. That's the way. Hopefully getting cute may cover the failure of your unfounded beliefs, is that it?

Sometimes when I encounter extreme ignorance I get frustrated.

A published study was not published by the gods. It is published by somebody desperate to have something to publish.

When a study is published the journal is not saying it agrees with the conclusions or that the conclusions even make sense.

You clearly have never had any education in dealing with published research.

You can't just shove an abstract out there and expect people to bow to it's brilliance. Most likely it is nonsense.

 

[ryan]

yes. But thiose "mental thoughts about epiphenomenalism" isnt based on observation.
Since if it where they cannot have caused them...

Do you really not understand this?

Why wouldn't the brain cause them like it would any other thought?

 

[Juma]

yes. But thiose "mental thoughts about epiphenomenalism" isnt based on observation.
Since if it where they cannot have caused them...

Do you really not understand this?

Why wouldn't the brain cause them like it would any other thought?

i do not say that the brain doesnt cause the (mistaken) belief in epiphenomenalism.
Answer this: how do you observe the (suggested) epiphenom that epiphenomenalism is about?

 

[fromderinside]

Fromderinside, your argument that science should have found it doesn't work because science may never find the actual consciousness given possible natures of it. The consciousness may be a reflection of matter. All matter might have this reflection. Matter detects other matter, but it doesn't seem to detect consciousness.

Similarly, consciousness may just be an intrinsic property of matter that has no physical property that allows it to be detected.

I want it to be true, please, make it to be true? Descending to new lows.

 

[fromderinside]

Panpsychism explains the origin of the consciousness in terms of its existence with one or more fundamental particles. The unification problem would remain a mystery (Except that entanglement seems to be the most obvious solution).

Show us any evidence, any evidence, any evidence, else drop it.

With respect to entanglement is is what it is. Causality apparently needs no time this that because time isn't part of quantum causality. Its just order, or less, just existence. These are then those are there. They work just as well. Its as if if that isn't this must be. Have fun with this new little toy. Its like ryan sun fromderinside rain

 

[ryan]

Why wouldn't the brain cause them like it would any other thought?

i do not say that the brain doesnt cause the (mistaken) belief in epiphenomenalism.
Answer this: how do you observe the (suggested) epiphenom that epiphenomenalism is about?

The consciousness is strangely unified (the unification problem). Not only is it unified, but it has a metaphysical ability to "connect" 2 different things to give more information about the comparison (eg: linguistics).

So when the consciousness experiences its sudden discontinuous beginning, like every morning we wake up, there is that bit of information that stays/entangles/integrates. And that bit of information would be where the thought of origins (or "coming from") comes from. But that's just my philosophy. But like with every theory, there are questions about them that are unanswered. Not much of anything we theorize about is complete.

 

[ryan]

Fromderinside, your argument that science should have found it doesn't work because science may never find the actual consciousness given possible natures of it. The consciousness may be a reflection of matter. All matter might have this reflection. Matter detects other matter, but it doesn't seem to detect consciousness.

Similarly, consciousness may just be an intrinsic property of matter that has no physical property that allows it to be detected.

I want it to be true, please, make it to be true? Descending to new lows.

Yeah, I really want to be a reflection of matter, a shadow of matter. Don't be cynical; some people might actually be trying to figure this out regardless of its appeal.

 

[Juma]

i do not say that the brain doesnt cause the (mistaken) belief in epiphenomenalism.
Answer this: how do you observe the (suggested) epiphenom that epiphenomenalism is about?

The consciousness is strangely unified (the unification problem). Not only is it unified, but it has a metaphysical ability to "connect" 2 different things to give more information about the comparison (eg: linguistics).

So when the consciousness experiences its sudden discontinuous beginning, like every morning we wake up, there is that bit of information that stays/entangles/integrates. And that bit of information would be where the thought of origins (or "coming from") comes from. But that's just my philosophy. But like with every theory, there are questions about them that are unanswered. Not much of anything we theorize about is complete.

That was just a dodge. It had nothing to do with our discussion of epiphenomenalism:

Answer this: how do you observe the (suggested) epiphenom that epiphenomenalism is about?

 

[ryan]

The consciousness is strangely unified (the unification problem). Not only is it unified, but it has a metaphysical ability to "connect" 2 different things to give more information about the comparison (eg: linguistics).

So when the consciousness experiences its sudden discontinuous beginning, like every morning we wake up, there is that bit of information that stays/entangles/integrates. And that bit of information would be where the thought of origins (or "coming from") comes from. But that's just my philosophy. But like with every theory, there are questions about them that are unanswered. Not much of anything we theorize about is complete.

That was just a dodge. It had nothing to do with our discussion of epiphenomenalism:

Answer this: how do you observe the (suggested) epiphenom that epiphenomenalism is about?

I explained it. Epiphenomenalism is about origins, particularly origin of consciousness. Origin of the consciousness happens every morning. The actual act of coming from something (the brain) would be itself the self-evident information of an origin.

 

[untermensche]

That was just a dodge. It had nothing to do with our discussion of epiphenomenalism:

Answer this: how do you observe the (suggested) epiphenom that epiphenomenalism is about?

I explained it. Epiphenomenalism is about origins, particularly origin of consciousness. Origin of the consciousness happens every morning. The actual act of coming from something (the brain) would be itself the self-evident information of an origin.

Do you know what the word "origin" means?

It does not mean "To continue".

If I am reading a book and stop, when I go back and continue reading it is not an origin.

In terms of human existence there are no origins.

There are only continuations and change. And ends.

No person is a blank slate. No person is an origin.

 

[Juma]

That was just a dodge. It had nothing to do with our discussion of epiphenomenalism:

Answer this: how do you observe the (suggested) epiphenom that epiphenomenalism is about?

I explained it. Epiphenomenalism is about origins, particularly origin of consciousness. Origin of the consciousness happens every morning. The actual act of coming from something (the brain) would be itself the self-evident information of an origin.

No. That is not a description of to observe epiphenomenalism.
Epiphenomenalism is saying that a certain phenomen is an epiphenomen that doesnt affect the brain.
But if it doesnt affect the brain, how can the brain be aware of it?

Which leads to the question: how do you observe this epiphenomenal phenomen.

 

[ryan]

I explained it. Epiphenomenalism is about origins, particularly origin of consciousness. Origin of the consciousness happens every morning. The actual act of coming from something (the brain) would be itself the self-evident information of an origin.

Do you know what the word "origin" means?

It does not mean "To continue".

If I am reading a book and stop, when I go back and continue reading it is not an origin.

In terms of human existence there are no origins.

There are only continuations and change. And ends.

No person is a blank slate. No person is an origin.

Though the identity of my consciousness is continuous, the origin of every stream of consciousness presumably has an origin/beginning. Even thoughts within my continuous stream of consciousness have their origins.

 

[ryan]

I explained it. Epiphenomenalism is about origins, particularly origin of consciousness. Origin of the consciousness happens every morning. The actual act of coming from something (the brain) would be itself the self-evident information of an origin.

No. That is not a description of to observe epiphenomenalism.
Epiphenomenalism is saying that a certain phenomen is an epiphenomen that doesnt affect the brain.
But if it doesnt affect the brain, how can the brain be aware of it?

Which leads to the question: how do you observe this epiphenomenal phenomen.

What I said is the answer to your question. In the case of consciousness, what happens to the consciousness is the observation. If not, then you would observe the observation, which means you need to observe the observed observation which means ... and it regresses an infinite number of times.

 

[untermensche]

Do you know what the word "origin" means?

It does not mean "To continue".

If I am reading a book and stop, when I go back and continue reading it is not an origin.

In terms of human existence there are no origins.

There are only continuations and change. And ends.

No person is a blank slate. No person is an origin.

Though the identity of my consciousness is continuous, the origin of every stream of consciousness presumably has an origin/beginning. Even thoughts within my continuous stream of consciousness has an origin.

I don't know what you mean by "stream of consciousness".

The consciousness is a living thing like everything about the human. It grows, it changes. Nightly it seems to stop for a while but starting up is a continuation, not an origin.

An origin is something completely new. Not a continuation of something well known.

 

[Juma]

No. That is not a description of to observe epiphenomenalism.
Epiphenomenalism is saying that a certain phenomen is an epiphenomen that doesnt affect the brain.
But if it doesnt affect the brain, how can the brain be aware of it?

Which leads to the question: how do you observe this epiphenomenal phenomen.

What I said is the answer to your question. In the case of consciousness, what happens to the consciousness is the observation. If not, then you would observe the observation, which means you need to observe the observed observation which means ... and it regresses an infinite number of times.

no, it isnt. You say nothing about the epiphenomen.
There is nothing in what you describe that singles out the epiphenomen and thus is not an observation of it.

I observe that I sm aware. But it is clearly no epiphenomen since it affects my brain so I can write about it.

 

[ryan]

Though the identity of my consciousness is continuous, the origin of every stream of consciousness presumably has an origin/beginning. Even thoughts within my continuous stream of consciousness has an origin.

I don't know what you mean by "stream of consciousness".

The consciousness is a living thing like everything about the human. It grows, it changes. Nightly it seems to stop for a while but starting up is a continuation, not an origin.

An origin is something completely new. Not a continuation of something well known.

You really don't know what is meant by "stream of consciousness"? Webster has, "the continuous unedited chronological flow of conscious experience through the mind". But I expect you to already know this.

As for origin, I am being very specific in that it is a part of a larger continuous identity that originates/begins every morning.

 

[ryan]

What I said is the answer to your question. In the case of consciousness, what happens to the consciousness is the observation. If not, then you would observe the observation, which means you need to observe the observed observation which means ... and it regresses an infinite number of times.

no, it isnt. You say nothing about the epiphenomen.
There is nothing in what you describe that singles out the epiphenomen and thus is not an observation of it.

I observe that I sm aware. But it is clearly no epiphenomen since it affects my brain so I can write about it.

Why can't the brain just do what it does while it generates these thoughts?