-
Features
Ideasthesia
- Thread starter WAB
- Start date
Speakpigeon
Contributor
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2009
- Messages
- 6,317
- Location
- Paris, France, EU
- Basic Beliefs
- Rationality (i.e. facts + logic), Scepticism (not just about God but also everything beyond my subjective experience)
It certainly works for me but I wonder if it would for all extraterrestrial beings.
Still, fascinating.
EB
Still, fascinating.
EB
WAB
Veteran Member
According to the article, 98% of people asked gave the same answer, which is what I did too. I found this fascinating as well.
98%????
Among autistic people, it was much lower, around 50%.
98%????
Among autistic people, it was much lower, around 50%.
untermensche
Contributor
Who knows what the bat is experiencing with sound?
But two evolved brains can make different things out of the same external stimulation.
What the brain makes is arbitrary and capricious.
It is not forced.
But two evolved brains can make different things out of the same external stimulation.
What the brain makes is arbitrary and capricious.
It is not forced.
Subsymbolic
Screwtape
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2017
- Messages
- 806
- Location
- Under the Gnomon
- Basic Beliefs
- Beliefs are an ancient theory of brain content which would be ripe for rejection except it's the idiom in which we came to know ourselves and thus elimination is problematic. We make it up from there
Ninety eight percent behave as if it is and can only offer post hoc rationalisations as to why. Wednesday is also fatter than Tuesday and Greamy Slubs is a bad name for a breakfast cereal. Trying to use Nagel here misunderstands both his paper and the problem here.
untermensche
Contributor
You're talking about one species. One tiny thread in the fabric of life.
I'm talking about all of life.
Yes in one species the brain does one thing.
And in the bee and in the bat it does something else. It creates different effects.
Because the effects the brain creates are arbitrary and capricious. They are dependent on contingency and the limits of biology and matter, not design.
WAB
Veteran Member
Sub, what do you see as the "problem here"? I don't exactly get it.
I mean, I don't think this really means much of anything, but found it amazing that such a high percentage of people would give the same answer. It was primarily for that that I thought it might be food for thought, or thread fodder.
Doesn't it essentially boil down to the probability that most people associate 'k' sounds with sharper edges, and 'b' sounds with softer, rounder edges? (Or even that kiki is on the left and bouba is on the right...)
Nonetheless, 98% is practically unheard of in these kind of tests, unless I am mistaken?
I mean, I don't think this really means much of anything, but found it amazing that such a high percentage of people would give the same answer. It was primarily for that that I thought it might be food for thought, or thread fodder.
Doesn't it essentially boil down to the probability that most people associate 'k' sounds with sharper edges, and 'b' sounds with softer, rounder edges? (Or even that kiki is on the left and bouba is on the right...)
Nonetheless, 98% is practically unheard of in these kind of tests, unless I am mistaken?
Subsymbolic
Screwtape
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2017
- Messages
- 806
- Location
- Under the Gnomon
- Basic Beliefs
- Beliefs are an ancient theory of brain content which would be ripe for rejection except it's the idiom in which we came to know ourselves and thus elimination is problematic. We make it up from there
I wasn’t aware that all of life could read.
Subsymbolic
Screwtape
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2017
- Messages
- 806
- Location
- Under the Gnomon
- Basic Beliefs
- Beliefs are an ancient theory of brain content which would be ripe for rejection except it's the idiom in which we came to know ourselves and thus elimination is problematic. We make it up from there
I think this one is for Cop as he’s the word expert. Certainly when I last pissed around with this there was no real consensus. Personally I think this is one of those unsolved problems that will suddenly have an answer on the day psychology has its Newton. The it will be so obvious we can all see it. See also Brownian Motion.
And yes, 98% is insane. Asking people if ducks are fish will get you less.
untermensche
Contributor
What hole that came from I don't know.
But what evolving brains make from external stimulation is arbitrary and capricious.
There is nothing telling evolving brains which direction to go or what to make of external stimulation.
Subsymbolic
Screwtape
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2017
- Messages
- 806
- Location
- Under the Gnomon
- Basic Beliefs
- Beliefs are an ancient theory of brain content which would be ripe for rejection except it's the idiom in which we came to know ourselves and thus elimination is problematic. We make it up from there
Apart from the minor detail of selective pressure of course.
As for which hole, I assume that you read the OP before posting?
ruby sparks
Contributor
Has anybody tried this test on Germans?
I just notice that the word for 'blob' in German is 'klecks', while the word for 'sharp' is 'scharf'.
I just notice that the word for 'blob' in German is 'klecks', while the word for 'sharp' is 'scharf'.
untermensche
Contributor
What things do "selective pressures" direct a brain to make of any external stimulation?
Impossible for an external stimulation to force an evolving brain to do anything.
All brain products, from the visual experience to the auditory experience to the the experience of thoughts, are random contingencies.
Nothing was forced or directed.
Subsymbolic
Screwtape
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2017
- Messages
- 806
- Location
- Under the Gnomon
- Basic Beliefs
- Beliefs are an ancient theory of brain content which would be ripe for rejection except it's the idiom in which we came to know ourselves and thus elimination is problematic. We make it up from there
How exactly do you think evolution works?
untermensche
Contributor
Many ways.
The external world cannot force an evolving brain to make anything.
Things arise randomly and they either help or hurt the odds of survival. If they help they are many times retained and modified over time.
WAB
Veteran Member
ruby sparks:
Good point!
[Sorry, all. I keep hitting the reply button instead of the reply with quote button, and then posting without realizing it]
Good point!
[Sorry, all. I keep hitting the reply button instead of the reply with quote button, and then posting without realizing it]
- ruby
Subsymbolic
Screwtape
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2017
- Messages
- 806
- Location
- Under the Gnomon
- Basic Beliefs
- Beliefs are an ancient theory of brain content which would be ripe for rejection except it's the idiom in which we came to know ourselves and thus elimination is problematic. We make it up from there
As usual, you are hopelessly confused. When you talk of an evolving brain, you can only be talking about a process that occurs across generations. Evolution is not a process that occurs within individual creatures. It is only by screwing up and trying to look at an evolving brain in an individual that you can come to such a daft conclusion. Once again, internal consistency is lacking, just as when you help yourself to your subjective seemings while insisting others are objective.
It seems like that's part of it, but as English readers our interpretation is also biased by the glyphs we use for those consonants.
untermensche
Contributor
You at least somewhat understand what I mean by an "evolving brain". A brain changing over millions of years.
And an evolving brain cannot be directed to produce anything.
Everything it creates, from the visual experience to the auditory experience to thoughts and sensations, are arbitrary and capricious.
They all arose by chance. Not any design.
Jobar
Zen Hedonist
I agree with Ruby that this may be an artifact of English, or maybe of Romance or Indo-European languages more generally. Kiki: prickle. Bouba: blob.
It would be interesting to test this in multiple language families.
It would be interesting to test this in multiple language families.