The human mind

[untermensche]

Your stupid question has been answered.

When you can explain how the mind works you will understand how it can be used to make autonomous decisions.

Until then we know autonomy is necessary for any opinion to have value.

Are your opinions autonomously made?

Or are they worthless?

 

[DBT]

My question has been answered? When did that happen?

 

[untermensche]

My question has been answered? When did that happen?

Are you autonomously wanting to know?

Or is your questioning worthless?

You are in a philosophy section.

And are unarmed.

 

[DBT]

Please answer the last question: when did you address my original question?

 

[untermensche]

I need to know and cannot answer until I know.

Are you autonomously wanting to know?

Or is your questioning worthless?

 

[DBT]

Of course you can answer. It is your claim that's being questioned.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

A memory might be triggered or might not. The experience of the color is the same.

False. The “experience of the color” changes every single time the wavelength is encountered, if only incrementally.

Some unrelated memory has nothing to do with the real time experience.

It is not “unrelated.” That’s what association means.

No, not "entirely different kind

Yes entirely.

You don’t know what “association” means and you don’t know what “categories” are.

One is colorless information, light energy, and one is the experience of color. Two completely different kinds of information.

And the troll goes on and on and on. As I pointed out previously (and you cut off), even if that were the case, it is an entirely irellevant statement. The “experience of color” is the result of processing the information associated with the wavelength/word (both new and stored). It does not matter what “kinds” of information get associated with the wavelength/word.

You cannot ever avoid or get around that fact. Is always fucks you in your ass no matter how long you keep this pointless troll going.

 

[untermensche]

False. The “experience of the color” changes every single time the wavelength is encountered, if only incrementally.

Evidence?

And the troll goes on and on and on.

Only to ignorant ass wipes that pull shit from their asses and claim it doesn't stink.

The same light stimuli under the same lighting conditions in the same setting will always be experienced the same way.

Memory doesn't have a fucking thing to do with it.

Color production is a reflexive transformation, nothing else.

Anything can trigger a memory. It doesn't make it a part of the thing experienced.

 

[untermensche]

Of course you can answer. It is your claim that's being questioned.

I can answer many things but you can't possibly think philosophically and answer:

Are you autonomously wanting to know something?

Or is your questioning worthless?

Why would I care about worthless non-autonomous questions?

How does one live thinking they can't make autonomous decisions? To actually believe it takes the autonomy to believe things.

Believing is an autonomous activity. We chose what we believe, even stupid things like we have no autonomy. Nothing forces us.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

Evidence?

Kettle? Black.

The same light stimuli under the same lighting conditions in the same setting will always be experienced the same way.

Evidence?

Memory doesn't have a fucking thing to do with it. Color production is a reflexive transformation, nothing else.

All thoughts you immediately contradict with:

Anything can trigger a memory.

So, which is it?

It doesn't make it a part of the thing experienced.

Idiot.

 

[untermensche]

Kettle? Black.

You have nothing to defend that shit idea you keep repeating?

What is known beyond doubt by those who understand evolution is there is no way for EM radiation to force a brain to create a certain color.

If a color is created from the stimulus then specific evolved mechanisms must exist for that purpose.

And memory can't even enter the picture until something is experienced so the experience of color must exist before memory even enters the picture.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

Kettle? Black.

You have nothing to defend that shit idea you keep repeating?

Kettle? It’s Pot again. You’re black.

What is known beyond doubt by those who understand evolution is there is no way for EM radiation to force a brain to create a certain color.

Fascinating. It has absolutely nothing to do with anything I’ve argued, but

If a color is created from the stimulus

Straw.

then specific evolved mechanisms must exist for that purpose.

Non-sequitur.

And memory can't even enter the picture until something is experienced

Correct.

so the experience of color

Is the processing of information either stored (aka, a “memory”), or concurrently “recorded” (and associated) at the time of the stimulus, which starts as an infant.

 

[DBT]

Kettle? Black.

You have nothing to defend that shit idea you keep repeating?

What is known beyond doubt by those who understand evolution is there is no way for EM radiation to force a brain to create a certain color.

If a color is created from the stimulus then specific evolved mechanisms must exist for that purpose.

And memory can't even enter the picture until something is experienced so the experience of color must exist before memory even enters the picture.

Who said anything about the brain being "forced" to do what it does?

 

[untermensche]

Is the processing of information either stored (aka, a “memory”), or concurrently “recorded” (and associated) at the time of the stimulus, which starts as an infant.

Stored information is not necessarily memory or part of the memory system. A bird does not build a nest by using memory.

The ability to create blue from a stimuli has nothing to do with memory and everything to do with separate evolved mechanisms that transform stimuli into a visual experience.

- - - Updated - - -

Kettle? Black.

You have nothing to defend that shit idea you keep repeating?

What is known beyond doubt by those who understand evolution is there is no way for EM radiation to force a brain to create a certain color.

If a color is created from the stimulus then specific evolved mechanisms must exist for that purpose.

And memory can't even enter the picture until something is experienced so the experience of color must exist before memory even enters the picture.

Who said anything about the brain being "forced" to do what it does?

If the stimuli has any information about color then it would have to force the brain somehow to create that color from the information.

Conclusion: The stimuli has no information about color contained within it.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

You have nothing to defend that shit idea you keep repeating?

What is known beyond doubt by those who understand evolution is there is no way for EM radiation to force a brain to create a certain color.

How many fucking strawmen are you going to stuff?

If [an experience of a] color is created generated from the stimulus then specific evolved mechanisms must exist for that purpose.

And memory can't even enter the picture until something is experienced so the [first] experience of [a particular wavelength and all concurrent information that was likewise collected by the body at the time of that particular stimulus] must exist before [a] memory evenenters the picture.

Fify. Again. Because you're a fucking troll or congenital idiot, which.

 

[untermensche]

Color cannot be generated by a colorless stimuli.

All a colorless stimuli can do is trigger a brain to use pre-existing mechanisms to create the experience of a color.

And memory doesn't have a thing to do with it.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

Color cannot be generated by a colorless stimuli.

So, iow, the wavelength that the brain associates—since Kindergarten—with a particular word.

All a colorless stimuli can do is trigger a brain to use pre-existing mechanisms to create the experience of a color.

YES! You finally have it. And now, of course, you’ll pretend this was something you had always argued, but, of course, never did.

And memory doesn't have a thing to do with it.

Awww. So close. The answer was: And memories[/s] that are associated with the wavelength stimulus have everything to do with it, after the intiial wavelength stimulus—and all associated information that was being processed at the time of the stimulus—was experienced some time in infancy.

Sorry, you’re still a fucking moron troll, so it’s a surety you’ll post yet more pathetic drivel with the same deliberate fallacies.

 

[steve_bank]

Color cannot be generated by a colorless stimuli.

All a colorless stimuli can do is trigger a brain to use pre-existing mechanisms to create the experience of a color.

And memory doesn't have a thing to do with it.

You are usable to reason through a simple causal chain.

blue wavelengths-> eyes-> optic nerves-> optic center in brain-> blue image

Where the wavelets are transformed to a blue image by brain chemistry and neural processing. Or another way of stating, wavelengths detected by wavelength sensitive cones in the eye stimulate a response we call color vision. The perception of color is generic. There are genetic defects that make some people color blind.

If color perception is a function of your concept of mind independent of brain, how do you explain those who are color blind?

Is that unclear?

 

[untermensche]

So, iow, the wavelength that the brain associates—since Kindergarten—with a particular word.

No.

The word green is associated with several wavelengths.

One that on it's own causes the brain to create the experience of green and also the combination of wavelengths that on their own would cause the brain to create blue and yellow.

The brain is capturing the information right in front of us and trying to transform THAT information into an experience.

Memory has NOTHING to do with color creation by a brain.

Trying to mix in memories will not help us know about the information right in front of us.

It will actually hinder that process.

You are talking nonsense and can't defend a word of it.

And if you say that you are rubber and I am glue again instead of actually trying to defend your ideas your will merely prove again what a fool you are.

 

[untermensche]

Color cannot be generated by a colorless stimuli.

All a colorless stimuli can do is trigger a brain to use pre-existing mechanisms to create the experience of a color.

And memory doesn't have a thing to do with it.

You are usable to reason through a simple causal chain.

blue wavelengths-> eyes-> optic nerves-> optic center in brain-> blue image

Where the wavelets are transformed to a blue image by brain chemistry and neural processing. Or another way of stating, wavelengths detected by wavelength sensitive cones in the eye stimulate a response we call color vision. The perception of color is generic. There are genetic defects that make some people color blind.

If color perception is a function of your concept of mind independent of brain, how do you explain those who are color blind?

Is that unclear?

Is there color information in the wavelength?

If so how does the EM energy force a brain to create that color? How does a brain get the information about that color?

Your answers here will tell us if you have a clue.

What color production does is show that the mind is being fed information from the brain.

The brain that can turn a stimulation into the experience of color doesn't need some subject to experience it. The brain can just experience it, whatever that could possibly mean.

A brain that can experience doesn't need a subject that is experiencing anything.

A brain that can experience has no need of a mind.