Free Will And Free Choice

[fromderinside]

Turn to page 332 in your Hymnal and let us sing "Halleluiah"! A one and a two and a three ...

 

[untermensche]

It is not religion to know you experience.

It is self delusion to say you don't.

 

[DBT]

I know that damaged brains do not work like undamaged brains.

And strange things can happen to people with damaged brains.

I also know that you can't understand how a normal brain works by looking at damaged brains.

You understand how undamaged brains work by looking at undamaged brains and we already know how undamaged brains work. We see them at work constantly.

With an undamaged brain you recognized left from right easily and consistently and move your limbs at will.

You miss the point, studies using electrical stimulation, chemical changes, lesions, pathologies, etc, reveal how the brain function....

They produce pathological abnormal function, not normal function.

And you or anyone else have no clue what a drug like LSD or any drug is specifically doing to brain function.

All we know is the subjective effect and where the drug binds.

And knowing where a drug binds tells us nothing about the overall effect to the activity creating consciousness.

We don't even know what specific activity is creating consciousness.

No, they don't. The very point of these experiments and studies being to better understand the brain and its functions.

You of course know better.

 

[fromderinside]

Balls said the queen. If I had two I would be king.

 

[untermensche]

They produce pathological abnormal function, not normal function.

And you or anyone else have no clue what a drug like LSD or any drug is specifically doing to brain function.

All we know is the subjective effect and where the drug binds.

And knowing where a drug binds tells us nothing about the overall effect to the activity creating consciousness.

We don't even know what specific activity is creating consciousness.

No, they don't. The very point of these experiments and studies being to better understand the brain and its functions.

You of course know better.

I do.

You can make a person's muscles contract with external electricity.

It tells you nothing about normal muscular stimulation.

 

[DBT]

They produce pathological abnormal function, not normal function.

And you or anyone else have no clue what a drug like LSD or any drug is specifically doing to brain function.

All we know is the subjective effect and where the drug binds.

And knowing where a drug binds tells us nothing about the overall effect to the activity creating consciousness.

We don't even know what specific activity is creating consciousness.

No, they don't. The very point of these experiments and studies being to better understand the brain and its functions.

You of course know better.

I do.

You can make a person's muscles contract with external electricity.

It tells you nothing about normal muscular stimulation.

It tells you which regions, structures, lobes, glands, etc, of the brain are responsible for motor action response, fear, pleasure, emotion and so on.

 

[untermensche]

I do.

You can make a person's muscles contract with external electricity.

It tells you nothing about normal muscular stimulation.

It tells you which regions, structures, lobes, glands, etc, of the brain are responsible for motor action response, fear, pleasure, emotion and so on.

Not necessarily responsible but related to.

You get brain areas related to certain function.

But we already got a lot of that once MRI was available looking at strokes and before that doing autopsies on people who had strokes or brain damage.

We don't understand fear any better today than it was understood in 1000 BC. Fear is an experience. What makes it happen is interesting but not necessary to totally understand fear.

 

[DBT]

Despite your assertions to the contrary, "related to" in the sense of cause and effect....that neural structures generate consciousness. That consciousness does not exist without the electrochemical activity of neural architecture.

Are are invoking non material mind, something magical? Or is it quantum consciousness?

 

[untermensche]

You switch from talking about brain regions to talking about the whole brain.

Looking at regions that can effect subjective reports can tell us what regions are related to the change in subjective report.

It does not tell us those regions are solely responsible for enabling the experience that enables the subjective report about it.

 

[fromderinside]

Who gives a blank about a subjective statement. Not useable. Tie the subjective statement to something objective and we're ready to play.

We subjectively experience the sun circled the earth. Then we worked out the earth is a spheroid, that the moon circled the earth, the earth circled the sun and stars were really a long way off. Now we know all the above and we can measure and gauges them appropriately. We still have that subjective experience but we know it is bogus.

I think it's time we did something like that with subjective experience, consciousness, self, and the rest of this so called rational claptrap.

You don't wanna, fine. Go play with yourself and let those of us who want to move forward get back to doing so.

 

[untermensche]

Who gives a blank about a subjective statement.

The entire study of human consciousness that relies on them and has no information about experience without them.

What do you think the Libet studies were?

They relied on subjective guesses about the timing of invisible events.

 

[DBT]

Who gives a blank about a subjective statement.

The entire study of human consciousness that relies on them and has no information about experience without them.

What do you think the Libet studies were?

They relied on subjective guesses about the timing of invisible events.

The subject reports what they are experiencing while the researchers image, fMRI, their brain. Much the same with brain stimulation or chemical interventions, the current or chemical is applied, the subjects report their experience and the results are analyzed, applying current to x region results in feelings of fear, love, etc.

The experience of the subject is directly related to whatever is happening within the architecture of their brain in that instance in time.

 

[DBT]

You switch from talking about brain regions to talking about the whole brain.

Looking at regions that can effect subjective reports can tell us what regions are related to the change in subjective report.

It does not tell us those regions are solely responsible for enabling the experience that enables the subjective report about it.

You are not paying attention. The brain is modular but its regions, lobes, glands, etc, contribute to the function of the brain as a whole.

 

[fromderinside]

Who gives a blank about a subjective statement.

The entire study of human consciousness that relies on them and has no information about experience without them.

What do you think the Libet studies were?

They relied on subjective guesses about the timing of invisible events.

OK you read first sentence. Now, in answer to the rest of your post is my second sentence

Tie the subjective statement to something objective and we're ready to play.

I still have patience to answer your Libet question, which as it turns out, is a germinal study doing the very thing I suggest.

From the wiki article:Benjamin Libet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Libet

His study was meant to demonstrate humans unconscious electrical processes in the brain called Bereitschaftspotential (or readiness potential) discovered by Lüder Deecke and Hans Helmut Kornhuber in 1964^[4] precede conscious decisions to perform volitional, spontaneous acts, implying that unconscious neuronal processes precede and potentially cause volitional acts which are retrospectively felt to be consciously motivated by the subject.

Those "invisible" events were objectively recorded readiness potentials generated in the brain recorded from those humans who were making the guesses.

IOW his experiment was a use of subjective responses to find objective correlates underlying them.

The very transition I talked about.

... and the rest is history

 

[none]

OK you read first sentence. Now, in answer to the rest of your post is my second sentence

Tie the subjective statement to something objective and we're ready to play.

I still have patience to answer your Libet question, which as it turns out, is a germinal study doing the very thing I suggest.

From the wiki article:Benjamin Libet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Libet

His study was meant to demonstrate humans unconscious electrical processes in the brain called Bereitschaftspotential (or readiness potential) discovered by Lüder Deecke and Hans Helmut Kornhuber in 1964^[4] precede conscious decisions to perform volitional, spontaneous acts, implying that unconscious neuronal processes precede and potentially cause volitional acts which are retrospectively felt to be consciously motivated by the subject.

Those "invisible" events were objectively recorded readiness potentials generated in the brain recorded from those humans who were making the guesses.

IOW his experiment was a use of subjective responses to find objective correlates underlying them.

The very transition I talked about.

... and the rest is history

some monkeys have tails.

 

[untermensche]

Those "invisible" events were objectively recorded readiness potentials generated in the brain recorded from those humans who were making the guesses.

Readiness potential is real.

Why it is there is pure conjecture.

The mind prepares for movement before it initiates it.

Take a thousand wild guesses about events that can't be seen and you have nothing but subjective guesses.

You do not have anything objective.

Any random set of numbers has a mean and a standard deviation.

These Libet type studies involving subjective guessing and basically relying on subjective guessing to draw conclusions are all an exercise in the self delusion of experimenters and their religious followers.

 

[fromderinside]

Those "invisible" events were objectively recorded readiness potentials generated in the brain recorded from those humans who were making the guesses.

Readiness potential is real.

Why it is there is pure conjecture.

The mind prepares for movement before it initiates it.

Take a thousand wild guesses about events that can't be seen and you have nothing but subjective guesses.

You do not have anything objective.

Any random set of numbers has a mean and a standard deviation.

These Libet type studies involving subjective guessing and basically relying on subjective guessing to draw conclusions are all an exercise in the self delusion of experimenters and their religious followers.

Your lines are obvious stream of consciousness babbling of one who conceives of EEG as being something produced on thermal paper in the 1920s.

As a beginning graduate student in 1968, I too, believed most EEG was meaningless because it is actually summed action potential as seen from the surface of the skull. It could apparently be mimicked with gel laden gourds or a string of worms which I often used to demonstrate to those who believed in it. However certain things stood out, certain things were signature relating to awareness and signal onset.

Since that time EEG has progressed very far with the aid of computer memory related correlational methods that pulled out more particular aspects of ongoing activity. The following study applied such techniques in 2020 aided with what had been learned in the previous 90 years.

While I still prefer such as fMRI and coded and dye blood transfer approaches the EEG stuff now is gaining credibility with the aid of multiple processors in some pretty original studies. What is being processed has been localized to activity in small clusters of cells several places in the brain at a time. Intelligent selection of locals and types of activity makes the information returned very objectively powerful.

Give it a look.

Neurophysiological mechanisms underlying motor feature binding processes and representations https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/hbm.25295

Abstract: Coherent, voluntary action requires an integrated representation of these actions and their defining features. Although theories delineate how action integration requiring binding between different action features may be accomplished, the underlying neurophysiological mechanisms are largely elusive. The present study examined the neurophysiological mechanisms underlying binding processes in actions. To this end, we conducted EEG recordings and applied standard event-related potential analyses, temporal EEG signal decomposition and multivariate pattern analyses (MVPA). According to the code occupation account, an overlap between a planned and a to-be-performed action impairs performance. The level, to which performance is attenuated depends on the strength of binding of action features. This binding process then determines the representation of them, the so-called action files. We show that code occupation and bindings between action features specifically modulate processes preceding motor execution as showed by the stimulus-locked lateralized readiness potential (LRP). Conversely, motor execution processes reflected by the response-locked LRP were not modulated by action file binding. The temporal decomposition of the EEG signal, further distinguished between action file related processes: the planned response determining code occupation was reflected in general (voluntary) response selection but notin involuntary (response priming-related) activation. Moreover, MVPA on temporally decomposed neural signals indicated that action files are represented as a continuous chain of activations. Within this chain, inhibitory and response re-activation pattern scan be distinguished. Taken together, the neurophysiological correlates of action file binding suggest that parallel, stimulus- and response-related pre-motor processes are responsible for the code occupation in the human motor system.

5 | CONCLUSIONS The present study addressed the neurophysiological mechanisms underlying binding processes in voluntary actions within the TEC framework. It examined the time course, functional different neural activity clusters, and the stability of the representational content of neurophysiological activity during action file coding. As such the study delineated the neurophysiological markers of the code occupation concept assumed to drive binding processes at the motor level (Stoet & Hommel, 1999). We showed that code occupation and bindings between action features specifically modulate pre-motor processes. Conversely, the motor execution processes were not modulated by action file binding. The temporal decomposition of the EEG signal further distinguished between action file related processes: the planned response, which the code occupation originated from, was reflected in general response selection (R-cluster) but not in priming-related (S-cluster) response activation. Altogether, the neurophysiological correlates of action file binding suggest that parallel, stimulus- and response related pre-motor processes are responsible for the code occupation. Moreover, decoded EEG and temporally decomposed neural signal indicated that action files are represented as a continuous chain of activations. Within this chain, inhibitory and response re-activation pattern scan be distinguished with signal decomposition.

I think you might just conclude that EEG is either already useful or at least becoming increasingly more so.

 

[DBT]

It seems that according to Unter, brain activity has no known function, its just there for decoration.

 

[untermensche]

It seems that according to Unter, brain activity has no known function, its just there for decoration.

What brain function are you specifically talking about?

Which brain function creates the phenomena of experience?

 

[untermensche]

Your lines are obvious stream of consciousness babbling of one who conceives of EEG as being something produced on thermal paper in the 1920s.

As a beginning graduate student in 1968, I too, believed most EEG was meaningless because it is actually summed action potential as seen from the surface of the skull. It could apparently be mimicked with gel laden gourds or a string of worms which I often used to demonstrate to those who believed in it. However certain things stood out, certain things were signature relating to awareness and signal onset.

Since that time EEG has progressed very far with the aid of computer memory related correlational methods that pulled out more particular aspects of ongoing activity. The following study applied such techniques in 2020 aided with what had been learned in the previous 90 years.

While I still prefer such as fMRI and coded and dye blood transfer approaches the EEG stuff now is gaining credibility with the aid of multiple processors in some pretty original studies. What is being processed has been localized to activity in small clusters of cells several places in the brain at a time. Intelligent selection of locals and types of activity makes the information returned very objectively powerful.

Give it a look.

Neurophysiological mechanisms underlying motor feature binding processes and representations https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/hbm.25295

Abstract: Coherent, voluntary action requires an integrated representation of these actions and their defining features. Although theories delineate how action integration requiring binding between different action features may be accomplished, the underlying neurophysiological mechanisms are largely elusive. The present study examined the neurophysiological mechanisms underlying binding processes in actions. To this end, we conducted EEG recordings and applied standard event-related potential analyses, temporal EEG signal decomposition and multivariate pattern analyses (MVPA). According to the code occupation account, an overlap between a planned and a to-be-performed action impairs performance. The level, to which performance is attenuated depends on the strength of binding of action features. This binding process then determines the representation of them, the so-called action files. We show that code occupation and bindings between action features specifically modulate processes preceding motor execution as showed by the stimulus-locked lateralized readiness potential (LRP). Conversely, motor execution processes reflected by the response-locked LRP were not modulated by action file binding. The temporal decomposition of the EEG signal, further distinguished between action file related processes: the planned response determining code occupation was reflected in general (voluntary) response selection but notin involuntary (response priming-related) activation. Moreover, MVPA on temporally decomposed neural signals indicated that action files are represented as a continuous chain of activations. Within this chain, inhibitory and response re-activation pattern scan be distinguished. Taken together, the neurophysiological correlates of action file binding suggest that parallel, stimulus- and response-related pre-motor processes are responsible for the code occupation in the human motor system.

5 | CONCLUSIONS The present study addressed the neurophysiological mechanisms underlying binding processes in voluntary actions within the TEC framework. It examined the time course, functional different neural activity clusters, and the stability of the representational content of neurophysiological activity during action file coding. As such the study delineated the neurophysiological markers of the code occupation concept assumed to drive binding processes at the motor level (Stoet & Hommel, 1999). We showed that code occupation and bindings between action features specifically modulate pre-motor processes. Conversely, the motor execution processes were not modulated by action file binding. The temporal decomposition of the EEG signal further distinguished between action file related processes: the planned response, which the code occupation originated from, was reflected in general response selection (R-cluster) but not in priming-related (S-cluster) response activation. Altogether, the neurophysiological correlates of action file binding suggest that parallel, stimulus- and response related pre-motor processes are responsible for the code occupation. Moreover, decoded EEG and temporally decomposed neural signal indicated that action files are represented as a continuous chain of activations. Within this chain, inhibitory and response re-activation pattern scan be distinguished with signal decomposition.

I think you might just conclude that EEG is either already useful or at least becoming increasingly more so.

You addressed no point I make and dealt with no problem I raised.

You claiming to understand one thing about actual brain function is funny.

You know absolutely nothing about it minus subjective reports.

Then you know a little. You know the subjective report and nothing else.