The human mind

[Koyaanisqatsi]

Knowing the dumb mechanism that created the mind tells you NOTHING.

You keep phrasing it in terms of an objective, physical object that has been created, past tense, like if you turn on a brain it shits out a discrete "mind" and then that thing--that separate, independent, discrete brain shit we call "mind"--just magically starts operating all on its own (with its own "dumb mechanisms"), as opposed to phrasing it properly: "knowing the dumb mechanism that creates 'mind'" which of course would tell us EVERYTHING.

The brain generates an analogue of the body (aka, a "self"), just as it generates analogues ("maps") of the external world. It superimposes the analogue self onto those "maps"--imbuing the self with a sense of autonomy, perhaps--in order to constantly test for optimal/beneficial outcomes within any given "mapped" territory prior to acting.

We call this process "consciousness" or "self-awareness" or "our mind" etc, but that's basically all it is. Problem solving/pattern recognizing using analogues of the body and the external world, based on the constant flow of telemetry about the external world that our bodies transmit to the brain every nano-second (or whatever the time frame may be for the eyes, nose, ears, skin, etc, to perform their respective information gathering/transmittal roles).

The body is literally one big multicellular sensory input device after all. That's essentially ALL it does; inputs trillions upon trillions of bits of information it constantly gathers from several different forms of unique sensor devices all allong a central nervous system feeding directly into the various organs/compartments of the brain (aka, our cognitive processing unit), which itself is likewise not one discrete unit, but actually several different units working in tandem and independently, with different functions and processes all their own.

Why is this so difficult for you to accept? The brain is simply maintaining a more-or-less "real time" animation--representative of the whole and imbued with all that it has experienced and learned--as both a social tool and a survival tool, as it navigates the whole--as optimally as possible--through a hostile spacetime environment.

Why does that notion terrify you so that you must constantly torture and twist logic and language to petulantly insist that a mind is a thing, not a process? It gets you exactly nowhere.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

That is nothing unless you can define dots and connect them.

The heater creates heat and the heat can have feedback on the heater.

All it takes is a thermostat.

That isn't "feedback." At least not in the sense you mean regarding "mind." A thermostat just measures the temperature of the room. "Heat" isn't some sort of discrete entity acting deliberately in some manner to send "feedback" to the heater, like you're claiming a "mind" can do.

But the heater is not in control of the thermostat. The heat is.

Nothing is "in control" in the sense of volition or "will," as, again, you have claimed to be the case with "mind."

 

[untermensche]

You don't seem to comprehend the idea of analogy.

The mind has no correlate.

All analogies will fall short.

But feedback is not a miracle.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

You don't seem to comprehend the idea of analogy.

Irony. Big fan.

The mind has no correlate.

See above.

But feedback is not a miracle.

It is if you're attributing volition to it.

 

[untermensche]

Not understanding how the mind achieves autonomy is not an argument showing how it can't possibly have autonomy.

You have nothing but claims derived from ignorance.

They are worthless.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

Not understanding how the mind achieves autonomy is not an argument showing how it can't possibly have autonomy.

Nor does merely asserting something must be true make it true.

You have nothing but claims derived from ignorance.

More irony.

They are worthless.

Final irony.

 

[untermensche]

You're the one making the stupid argument.

You are saying that autonomy is impossible yet you don't even have the slightest inkling what you're talking about. You don't even know what the mind is.

You have merely pulled some conclusion from your ass.

I have only claimed there is no reason to conclude it is impossible. Such conclusions can't be made in the absence of understanding.

But a mind cannot decide what is true and what is not unless it has the autonomy to make such decisions.

You display your ignorance when you both say you think something is false and also claim you don't have the autonomy to make such decisions.

 

[DBT]

Your analogy is flawed, a heater and thermostat are two separate and distinct objects/mechanisms. Conscious mind is inseparable from conscious brain activity, being one and the same process.

Unless you happen to be a dualist claiming a separation between body and mind, that mind is somehow an independent substance.

No, yours is the Fallacy of Defective Induction

The analogy is fine.

The brain creates the mind and the brain has feedback mechanisms that the mind can effect.

Move on.

You have no argument here.

And talking about a mind and a body when you have no idea what either are is just frivolous nonsense.

You dismiss the fact that conscious brain activity is one and the same thing as conscious mind because it does not suit your beliefs. Your dismissal of fact is not surprising given that you cling to your own idea of autonomy of mind so strongly. However that doesn't change the fact that your analogy was flawed for the reason given, and that your belief in an autonomous mind is wrong.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

You're the one making the stupid argument.

When you finally get pubic hair you can post again.

 

[Jokodo]

You're the one making the stupid argument.

You are saying that autonomy is impossible yet you don't even have the slightest inkling what you're talking about. You don't even know what the mind is.

You have merely pulled some conclusion from your ass.

I have only claimed there is no reason to conclude it is impossible. Such conclusions can't be made in the absence of understanding.

But a mind cannot decide what is true and what is not unless it has the autonomy to make such decisions.

You display your ignorance when you both say you think something is false and also claim you don't have the autonomy to make such decisions.

Any spam filter decides what is true and what is not. Do SPAM filters have autonomy from the code that defines them and the hardware they run on?

 

[untermensche]

You're the one making the stupid argument.

When you finally get pubic hair you can post again.

You have suddenly stopped making the stupid argument.

Good because it is worthless.

You can't claim something you know absolutely nothing about can't have autonomy.

And a human can't decide which ideas are good and which are total shit (your ideas) without the autonomy to do it.

- - - Updated - - -

You're the one making the stupid argument.

You are saying that autonomy is impossible yet you don't even have the slightest inkling what you're talking about. You don't even know what the mind is.

You have merely pulled some conclusion from your ass.

I have only claimed there is no reason to conclude it is impossible. Such conclusions can't be made in the absence of understanding.

But a mind cannot decide what is true and what is not unless it has the autonomy to make such decisions.

You display your ignorance when you both say you think something is false and also claim you don't have the autonomy to make such decisions.

Any spam filter decides what is true and what is not. Do SPAM filters have autonomy from the code that defines them and the hardware they run on?

They do what something with autonomy decided they wanted them to do.

When spam filters are naturally occurring and not a product of a human mind you will have a point.

 

[untermensche]

You dismiss the fact that conscious brain activity is one and the same thing as conscious mind because it does not suit your beliefs. Your dismissal of fact is not surprising given that you cling to your own idea of autonomy of mind so strongly. However that doesn't change the fact that your analogy was flawed for the reason given, and that your belief in an autonomous mind is wrong.

You can't make the claim that the totally unknown activity of the brain that somehow creates a mind is merely one and the same as the phenomena of mind without knowing what the specific activity is and what the mind is.

You are making claims from total ignorance.

But the truth is a person can't decide which ideas are good and which are bad without the autonomy to make such decisions.

Autonomy of mind is a given in those who freely decide which ideas are good and which are not.

Autonomy of mind is a given in all of human morality and the entire criminal justice system.

Your new age nonsense about a lack of autonomy, derived from total ignorance, flies in the face of all available evidence.

The mind is an evolved decision making device. And it's survival advantage is that decisions can be made using ideas, by dreaming about a different future, one that is created in the mind by the mind, as opposed to merely making decisions based only on apparent circumstances.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

You have suddenly stopped making the stupid argument.

You have never refuted any of my arguments, you sad little child. They don't magically go away just because you've thrown another tantrum.

You can't claim something you know absolutely nothing about can't have autonomy.

I didn't.

And a human can't decide

A "human" now. Nice. Broaden the category even further. Anything to avoid saying "brain." Because, for some bizarre reason you simply cannot comprehend the notion of the brain generating all of this at the exact same time that you affirm that it is the brain that generates all of this.

Any spam filter decides what is true and what is not. Do SPAM filters have autonomy from the code that defines them and the hardware they run on?

They do what something with autonomy decided they wanted them to do.

So, like a brain, that, say, creates maps of the external world and an analogue of itself representing the entire body--like an animation that is continuously updated/augmented in "real" time and created largely out of the quadrillions of bits of information gathered and stored from our experiences navigating the world--and it imbues with certain abilities (like a sense of autonomy) within and across the maps in order to essentially "role play" for social or strategic survival purposes? You know, like, exactly what happens every night when you dream?

When spam filters are naturally occurring and not a product of a human mind brain you will have a point.

Fify. Now neither of us have to use a term that isn't defined and we know absolutely nothing about and we're all safe (momentarily) from your petulant wrath.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

You can't make the claim that the totally unknown activity of the brain that somehow creates a mind is merely one and the same as the phenomena of mind without knowing what the specific activity is and what the mind is.

Neither can you unterjunge.

You are making claims from total ignorance.

Stop it with the irony already.

But the truth is a person can't decide which ideas are good and which are bad without the autonomy to make such decisions.

Autonomy from...?

Autonomy of mind is a given

Nothing can be a "given" if, as you put it, you are making claims from total ignorance. You can't even define "mind" let alone prove it exists.

The mind brain is an evolved decision making "device" (made up of several different components that have different functions). And it's survival advantage is that decisions can be made using ideas, by dreaming about a different future, one that is created in the "mind" by the mind brain...

Fify.

Or, even simpler:

The "mind" is an evolved "virtual reality" decision making algorithm created and dynamically maintained/updated by the brain. Its survival advantage is that it allows the brain to manipulate a "virtual reality" in numerous ways, so that optimal decisions can be made before the brain needs to act in the "real" world.

 

[untermensche]

Algorithms are human inventions.

You might as well say the mind is a steam engine.

You have as much evidence.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

Algorithms are human inventions.

Sooooo, are you saying that a "mind" is not a human invention or something?

You might as well say the mind is a steam engine.

Nowhere near analogous, but isn't that ironically exactly what you are asserting, at least in regard to form not function? That a "mind" is a distinct "device" created by the brain somehow/somewhere?

You have as much evidence.

You have zero evidence for your positions, unterjunge, so I wouldn't be throwing that word around. Glass houses and all.

 

[untermensche]

I have all kinds of evidence.

Every sentence I write is evidence of autonomy.

Every sentence you write, every whine you make, is evidence of your autonomy

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

I have all kinds of evidence.

You have zero evidence.

Every sentence I write is evidence of autonomy.

Not the question, but, once again, autonomy from what?

 

[Jokodo]

I have all kinds of evidence.

Every sentence I write is evidence of autonomy.

Most of them barely constitute evidence of any kind of mind, let alone an autonomous one. I could write a chatbot that's better at answering objections than you are. Would it have autonomy too?

 

[untermensche]

For you to decide if something is true or false requires autonomy.

We can take that little baby step initially to begin to spoon feed this to you?

Autonomy is needed to make decisions about ideas.

That is undisputed.

Now I know ideas exist in my mind.

All you have to do is prove a brain can have an idea minus a mind to have a point.