Consciousness

[DBT]

Like I said a stupid trick, not any kind of understanding of brain activity.

Says you. Which means nothing.

It's not a trick. The experiments, while still in their early stages, are a means by which to better understand how the brain functions. This is a work of discovery in progress, not tricks. That is your rationale, and a poor one at that.

All it shows is that conscious decision making is more complicated than we can understand presently.

A remark that shows a poor understanding of both the experiments and their results.

What is increasingly clear is that unconscious information processing precedes conscious awareness of decision making and action to be taken.....as it must, given the cognitive process is not magical.


Objects and events in the external world ->input of information from objects and events ->propagation of information throughout the neural networks of the brain -> conscious perception of that information forms ->conscious feelings and emotions emerge ->conscious thoughts and deliberations emerge -> a conscious impulse to respond (the conscious will to act) -> a conscious action is performed.

perceptual processing
• Superior colliculus

Modulation of cognition
(memory, attention)
• Cingulate cortex
• Hippocampus
• Basal forebrain

Representation of emotional response
• Somatosensory-related
cortices

Representation of perceived action
• Left frontal operculum
• Superior temporal gyrus

Motivational evaluation
• Amygdala
• Orbitofrontal cortex

Social reasoning
• Prefrontal cortex

 

[untermensche]

Says you. Which means nothing.

It's not a trick. The experiments, while still in their early stages, are a means by which to better understand how the brain functions. This is a work of discovery in progress, not tricks. That is your rationale, and a poor one at that.

They are worthless tricks.

They use computers to map "clouds" of activity without knowing anything about what the activity is.

It is not an explanation or understanding of what the brain is doing. Only where it is doing it.

The activity can be labeled anything you want arbitrarily, because none of it is understood.

All it shows is that conscious decision making is more complicated than we can understand presently.

A remark that shows a poor understanding of both the experiments and their results.

What is increasingly clear is that unconscious information processing precedes conscious awareness of decision making and action to be taken.....as it must, given the cognitive process is not magical.

Calling something "unconscious information processing" is first of all about as worthless and general a statement that could be made, but it it also merely pretending to know which activity is the result of consciousness and which is not.

The pretense gets old.

Your emperor has no clothes.

 

[DBT]

Hilarious, Mr Untermensche, your level of denial.

Unconscious decision making.
Previous research has shown motor-related brain activity preceding conscious intent by a fraction of a second, but this study is the first to show unconscious predictive activity in a region associated with decision making the prefrontal cortex according to Haynes. The results support the notion that unconscious brain activity comes first and conscious experience follows as a result, says Patrick Haggard of University College London, who was not involved with the study. We all think that we have a conscious free will, he says. However, this study shows that actions come from preconscious brain activity patterns and not from the person consciously thinking about what they are going to do.''


More:
''Nevertheless, as research continues to suggest, the keys to some of the brains most intriguing secrets its ability to learn, to imagine, to choose at will, will be found not only in its parts, but in their connections.''

 

[PyramidHead]

Is there a reason for this thread? Honestly.

 

[untermensche]

Hilarious, Mr Untermensche, your level of denial.

Unconscious decision making.
Previous research has shown motor-related brain activity preceding conscious intent by a fraction of a second, but this study is the first to show unconscious predictive activity in a region associated with decision making the prefrontal cortex according to Haynes. The results support the notion that unconscious brain activity comes first and conscious experience follows as a result, says Patrick Haggard of University College London, who was not involved with the study. We all think that we have a conscious free will, he says. However, this study shows that actions come from preconscious brain activity patterns and not from the person consciously thinking about what they are going to do.''


More:
''Nevertheless, as research continues to suggest, the keys to some of the brains most intriguing secrets its ability to learn, to imagine, to choose at will, will be found not only in its parts, but in their connections.''

Oh "motor related brain activity"?

In other words activity that arises that nobody knows how or by what initiation.

Your Emperor has no clothes.

 

[untermensche]

Is there a reason for this thread? Honestly.

What is the reason for any thread here?

Do they somehow serve a purpose?

It is people throwing out ideas.

Because nobody has a clue what consciousness is objectively.

Pointing to the brain like Frankenstein and saying "Consciousness" is not an understanding of any kind.

We only know it subjectively.

 

[PyramidHead]

Is there a reason for this thread? Honestly.

What is the reason for any thread here?

Do they somehow serve a purpose?

It is people throwing out ideas.

Because nobody has a clue what consciousness is objectively.

Pointing to the brain like Frankenstein and saying "Consciousness" is not an understanding of any kind.

We only know it subjectively.

Come on, please don't tell me you aren't getting sick of this back-and-forth a little bit.

 

[untermensche]

What is the reason for any thread here?

Do they somehow serve a purpose?

It is people throwing out ideas.

Because nobody has a clue what consciousness is objectively.

Pointing to the brain like Frankenstein and saying "Consciousness" is not an understanding of any kind.

We only know it subjectively.

Come on, please don't tell me you aren't getting sick of this back-and-forth a little bit.

It is a serious disagreement of opinion.

Experience clearly shows that the finger moves when we "will" it to move.

Some are claiming, based merely on activity they do not understand, that the conscious "will" has no involvement.

It is a wild and absurd claim considering the current level of understanding of brain activity.

 

[fromderinside]

Come on, please don't tell me you aren't getting sick of this back-and-forth a little bit.

It is a serious disagreement of opinion.

Experience clearly shows that the finger moves when we "will" it to move.

Some are claiming, based merely on activity they do not understand, that the conscious "will" has no involvement.

It is a wild and absurd claim considering the current level of understanding of brain activity.

Will requires  deterministic causality, something that we presume for the sake of science is true, for which we can't definitively demonstrate. It's like philosophers treat consciousness. Rationally it must be true since all of us experience it. Yet for science we have consistently succeeded in the macro world, the world of things we can mostly experience, to find cause and effect. We don't understand why this is so when we observe in the micro world time needn't be considered in this that studies where indeterminacy intervenes when can get something else.

So I've decided to ignore will, cause and effect, talk of process instead where I can intervene wherever I wish. Then machine is restored. In this world where one only looks to find cause and effect one finds effects in different places clearly related to cause.

As for all the blather about the brain being the center of thought and the seat of consciousness all I need demonstrate is that one thought follows another whether it is in the same point in the brain or not. I gather systems that perform functions, find connections between functions to find causal links, don't worry that the same place isn't always the seat of deciding. Now all that is necessary is demonstrate metabolic activity related to metabolic activity and that there be physical links between these activities to call them thoughts.

Wallah, I get a brain that acts like the brain scientists see. Now I'm able to conceive a brain that functions IAC deterministic principles which is malleable and I am satisfied the brain is the center of thought.

Consciousness need require no more than the systems Crick specified for consciousness and it need require no more than it is capable of functioning to discriminate food from not food. All there need be are input output, associate and memory functions to have a system (brain) capable of consciousness and thought. In fact if I just require thought that is sufficient so I get rid of rational self evidence entirely.

 

[untermensche]

You do not remove deterministic causality by pretending the brain somehow initiates the arm at rest to move, on it's own.

The problem of initiation does not disappear because one pretends consciousness is not initiating action.

 

[none]

Haha

 

[DBT]

Is there a reason for this thread? Honestly.

I don't know. Sniping practice I guess. Any participant is able to disengage at any time, but some choose not to.

 

[DBT]

Hilarious, Mr Untermensche, your level of denial.

Unconscious decision making.
Previous research has shown motor-related brain activity preceding conscious intent by a fraction of a second, but this study is the first to show unconscious predictive activity in a region associated with decision making the prefrontal cortex according to Haynes. The results support the notion that unconscious brain activity comes first and conscious experience follows as a result, says Patrick Haggard of University College London, who was not involved with the study. We all think that we have a conscious free will, he says. However, this study shows that actions come from preconscious brain activity patterns and not from the person consciously thinking about what they are going to do.''


More:
''Nevertheless, as research continues to suggest, the keys to some of the brains most intriguing secrets its ability to learn, to imagine, to choose at will, will be found not only in its parts, but in their connections.''

Oh "motor related brain activity"?

In other words activity that arises that nobody knows how or by what initiation.

Your Emperor has no clothes.

Empty rhetoric and hand waving. Ignore research, evidence, the commentary of researchers and analysts and dismiss anything that doesn't support your own version of alternate reality. Well done, Mr Untermensche.

 

[DBT]

You do not remove deterministic causality by pretending the brain somehow initiates the arm at rest to move, on it's own.

The problem of initiation does not disappear because one pretends consciousness is not initiating action.

No pretense, it's quite clear that the brain initiates conscious awareness of both thoughts and actions. Which requires prior milliseconds of information processing to achieve.

 

[fromderinside]

You do not remove deterministic causality by pretending the brain somehow initiates the arm at rest to move, on it's own.

The problem of initiation does not disappear because one pretends consciousness is not initiating action.

...and I did not.

All I said was that causality is where one finds it. Similar responses to similar acts need not occur in similar places. Every moment is different so every action in a causal chain is somewhat different. These are things within the scope of science to track whereas to the casual observer they look different. All one looks for in a chaotic system is consistency of function.

 

[untermensche]

You do not remove deterministic causality by pretending the brain somehow initiates the arm at rest to move, on it's own.

The problem of initiation does not disappear because one pretends consciousness is not initiating action.

No pretense, it's quite clear that the brain initiates conscious awareness of both thoughts and actions. Which requires prior milliseconds of information processing to achieve.

It is quite clear consciousness moves the arm at will.

No evidence shows otherwise.

There is unexplained activity that occurs as consciousness prepares to move that is labeled "unconscious".

The only problem is the person is not unconscious so labeling it as "unconscious" activity is just pretending to understand it.

You have nothing but a pretense to knowledge.

Nothing.

 

[untermensche]

You do not remove deterministic causality by pretending the brain somehow initiates the arm at rest to move, on it's own.

The problem of initiation does not disappear because one pretends consciousness is not initiating action.

...and I did not.

All I said was that causality is where one finds it. Similar responses to similar acts need not occur in similar places. Every moment is different so every action in a causal chain is somewhat different. These are things within the scope of science to track whereas to the casual observer they look different. All one looks for in a chaotic system is consistency of function.

This is called sweeping the problem under the rug.

And pretending it does not exist.

If the brain can initiate action where no action existed then there is no reason consciousness, a "module" of the brain can't do the same.

 

[untermensche]

Oh "motor related brain activity"?

In other words activity that arises that nobody knows how or by what initiation.

Your Emperor has no clothes.

Empty rhetoric and hand waving. Ignore research, evidence, the commentary of researchers and analysts and dismiss anything that doesn't support your own version of alternate reality. Well done, Mr Untermensche.

Address the comments.

If you can.

All these researchers see is activity arise where it was not.

That is all they have.

The rest is imagination.

They have no understanding of what caused it to arise or how it arose.

 

[PyramidHead]

No pretense, it's quite clear that the brain initiates conscious awareness of both thoughts and actions. Which requires prior milliseconds of information processing to achieve.

It is quite clear consciousness moves the arm at will.

No evidence shows otherwise.

There is unexplained activity that occurs as consciousness prepares to move that is labeled "unconscious".

The only problem is the person is not unconscious so labeling it as "unconscious" activity is just pretending to understand it.

You have nothing but a pretense to knowledge.

Nothing.

We know what happens when the arm is made to move, and we know what parts of the arm are relevant for that. Those parts are connected to the brain, which transmits signals to the arm, causing its muscles to contract. This results in movement. The signals that originate in the brain do not pop up at random. They are the results of previous signals, which themselves are the products of prior brain states and external stimuli, and so on. What I am trying to say here is that a causal explanation for the intentional movement of one's arm can be constructed without referring to anything other than the physical inputs and outputs of the central and peripheral nervous systems. There is no room for an external director, whose choice to move the arm appears as a causal component like a lightning bolt from Zeus, without any preceding physical events giving rise to it.

The physical explanation for a human being moving her arm is almost exactly the same as the explanation of a fish moving its fin, or an insect moving its wing. There are differences in complexity, but the overall pathway from electrochemical signal to the contraction of muscular or skeletal structure follows the same physical rules in both cases. Are you saying that the insect's consciousness moves its wing at will?

 

[fromderinside]

This is called sweeping the problem under the rug.

And pretending it does not exist.

If the brain can initiate action where no action existed then there is no reason consciousness, a "module" of the brain can't do the same.

Labeling an argument without evidence is not reason. Claiming something without example is not reason. You are unreasonable.